LVNV / Resurgent / Lawyer office / Why so serious?

[Zanshiro]

So, a co-worker of mine I'll name John Doe asked me for help when he saw how often I helped clients get bad credit improved to be able to get out of worse situations with vehicles and wot-wot.  Long story short, John had an issue a few years back with a divorce, and the ex ran up CCs before they split, and they were in his name.  Her lawyers basically had him eat his own sausage so to speak, and now he's trying to recover his credit to get his daughter and himself a better future.  I mostly sent him through triage and setup processes, and he's worked to write letters, most of which have been very effective, until we got to one of my least favorite PITAs to read about that I was glad I'd never had to deal with - LVNV Funding, which it appears bought some of that alleged debt from Comenity Bank via Buckle/VS/etc.  I advised him to write one of the letters without acknowledging it to counteroffer to pay for delete, which was certified and sent to LVNV....about a week later, he got a letter from "Schrier, Tolin, & Wagman, LLC" which appears a collection law firm.  So that was responded to that the account in question had been in dispute with the credit bureaus via Comenity when the letter from LVNV was received, and sent them a copy of the letter as well as LVNV's counsel as they stated they were.

 

Two more weeks pass, and he's had no direct contact or reply, but a letter now comes from Resurgent Capital regarding the same accounts stating that if no response was received in 30 days, it would be assumed valid....so after all the prior, THEN they sent out the contact that would be time for DV?  I'm just boggling at this point...and really that should fall under some sort of consumer protection ethos, but it's beyond my grasp, because I *think* the same company (Sherman) owns LVNV & Resurgent, but don't know about the lawyer office.  Treading carefully since he's about 8 months inside statute of limitations, what would his best move next be? Assuming to reply to that 30-day letter despite prior replies to essentially the same company, what a pain.

 

I did look up the CC agreements on the CFPB board, and they do allow arbitration, so I don't know if that's something he should go with now or at least make preparations for.  And since I don't want my personal link here passed around to fellow employees, yes, I'm acting as a go-between >_>

[legaleagle2012]

Arbitration works well against junk debt buyers. The startup fees alone are in the 6K range for them, and they cannot recover them. They rarely arbitrate, it makes no financial sense.

[centex]

Setting aside the incestuous relationship between some of the entities, that paper trail, as claimed in this thread, lays groundwork for a continued collection claim.  The matter was disputed and, rather than address the dispute, the can was kicked down the street.  Or likely, to the next cubicle in this case. 

 

Given that I suspect that each entity has its own DBA, it matters not one whit that they are arguably one and the same.  They CHOSE to engage in continued collections knowing it was a disputed claim.  That a contract was later sent does not obviate the continued collection vis-a-vis placement with a different office and without having conveyed to the new entity that the matter was disputed.

 

Handled properly, you could get paid by all three entities...