Ok, what now???

[UmmNyla]

Hi All,

 

Ok I have read and read and read, but for some reason at this point I'm not really sure what my next step should be. If someone could just point me in the right direction I would appreciate it so much.

 

I got my CRs about a month ago and disputed a total of 10 baddies (not all of them showing up on every report, but 10 in total). Five of them were deleted right away from TransUnion, although I haven't heard anything from Experian or Equifax yet. Another I received a letter from the CA stating the account had been closed, and when I sent a letter stating this to TransUnion they said that account isn't even listed on my report (weird, because I know it is or why would I have disputed it?)

 

I haven't heard back (validating the debt to be mine or otherwise) from any of the CA agencies, and it's been over a month now. I know they received the letters, I have all my green cards filed. Should I send them each a letter giving them a little nudge, or just outright let them know their time has expired, and they obviously have no proof the debts are mine, and they need to stop reporting on them?

 

If someone else has already asked this, I'm sorry. But I don't want to stop now when I've already had such a successful start.

 

Thanks so much for the help!

[cinnamngrl]

Hi All,

 

Ok I have read and read and read, but for some reason at this point I'm not really sure what my next step should be. If someone could just point me in the right direction I would appreciate it so much.

 

I got my CRs about a month ago and disputed a total of 10 baddies (not all of them showing up on every report, but 10 in total). Five of them were deleted right away from TransUnion, although I haven't heard anything from Experian or Equifax yet. Another I received a letter from the CA stating the account had been closed, and when I sent a letter stating this to TransUnion they said that account isn't even listed on my report (weird, because I know it is or why would I have disputed it?)

 

I haven't heard back (validating the debt to be mine or otherwise) from any of the CA agencies, and it's been over a month now. I know they received the letters, I have all my green cards filed. Should I send them each a letter giving them a little nudge, or just outright let them know their time has expired, and they obviously have no proof the debts are mine, and they need to stop reporting on them?

 

If someone else has already asked this, I'm sorry. But I don't want to stop now when I've already had such a successful start.

 

Thanks so much for the help!

 

 

 

My first question is have you received all of your disputes back from the CRAs? this can take 45 days, usually not but depending on the situation that is their max amount of time.

 

If the CRAs have validated an account that hasn't responded to your letter then send a copy of your green card and request method of verification. In your letter I would confront them about the fact that you have written them at the address they provided without response.

 

If CRAs haven't completed their verification then it is possible that these tradelines will fall off too. If you contact the CRAs too early, they will extend their investigation because of "new information"

[no100player]

Hi All,

 

Ok I have read and read and read, but for some reason at this point I'm not really sure what my next step should be. If someone could just point me in the right direction I would appreciate it so much.

 

I got my CRs about a month ago and disputed a total of 10 baddies (not all of them showing up on every report, but 10 in total). Five of them were deleted right away from TransUnion, although I haven't heard anything from Experian or Equifax yet. Another I received a letter from the CA stating the account had been closed, and when I sent a letter stating this to TransUnion they said that account isn't even listed on my report (weird, because I know it is or why would I have disputed it?)

 

I haven't heard back (validating the debt to be mine or otherwise) from any of the CA agencies, and it's been over a month now. I know they received the letters, I have all my green cards filed. Should I send them each a letter giving them a little nudge, or just outright let them know their time has expired, and they obviously have no proof the debts are mine, and they need to stop reporting on them?

 

If someone else has already asked this, I'm sorry. But I don't want to stop now when I've already had such a successful start.

 

Thanks so much for the help!

 

CA's aren't required to reply to DV's!

[beli]

Hi All,

 

Ok I have read and read and read, but for some reason at this point I'm not really sure what my next step should be. If someone could just point me in the right direction I would appreciate it so much.

 

I got my CRs about a month ago and disputed a total of 10 baddies (not all of them showing up on every report, but 10 in total). Five of them were deleted right away from TransUnion, although I haven't heard anything from Experian or Equifax yet. Another I received a letter from the CA stating the account had been closed, and when I sent a letter stating this to TransUnion they said that account isn't even listed on my report (weird, because I know it is or why would I have disputed it?)

 

I haven't heard back (validating the debt to be mine or otherwise) from any of the CA agencies, and it's been over a month now. I know they received the letters, I have all my green cards filed. Should I send them each a letter giving them a little nudge, or just outright let them know their time has expired, and they obviously have no proof the debts are mine, and they need to stop reporting on them?

 

If someone else has already asked this, I'm sorry. But I don't want to stop now when I've already had such a successful start.

 

Thanks so much for the help!

 

CA's aren't required to reply to DV's,

First off, only time Cra's have 45 days is if you base your dispute off of your reports from your free Annual credit report, otherwise they have 30. Period! Unless of course you accidentally send "additional" proof, then you will get an additional "15 days" which would make it 45days.

 

Second, Ca's are required to reply to Dv's, but they're just not under any time restraints. Common mis-interpretation a lot of new people have. The only time restraint is the debtor responding to a dunning letter, which you have to do within 30 days. The CA will reply once they hear back from the OC (This can take several months.. or several weeks) depends on the CA and their communication with the OC, and how long it takes the OC to find documents you requested. Or you may never hear from them at all.

 

It's common for Experian to verify tradelines through their "own" system. Meaning, if you have an old address and it is tied to the tradeline your disputing Experian will come back "verified" and have sent nothing to the CA. Equifax does this too but not nearly as often as Experian does. Not to mention, despite what your dispute said (if you made it confusing for Experian, which is pretty easy to do) they may just send the CA "Please verify name/ ssn/dob/address" regardless of what was sent. I've had this happen twice now, and I made my dispute pretty clear. The only way I found out Experian only requested to verify name/dob/ssn/address to this CA was because I got my states DFI involved because they kept verifying a wrong amount. Turns out, even tho I specifically disputed amount owed, Experian took it as "Please verify name/dob/ssn/address" nothing about amount.

Edited November 20, 2009 by beli

[no100player]

Hi All,

 

Ok I have read and read and read, but for some reason at this point I'm not really sure what my next step should be. If someone could just point me in the right direction I would appreciate it so much.

 

I got my CRs about a month ago and disputed a total of 10 baddies (not all of them showing up on every report, but 10 in total). Five of them were deleted right away from TransUnion, although I haven't heard anything from Experian or Equifax yet. Another I received a letter from the CA stating the account had been closed, and when I sent a letter stating this to TransUnion they said that account isn't even listed on my report (weird, because I know it is or why would I have disputed it?)

 

I haven't heard back (validating the debt to be mine or otherwise) from any of the CA agencies, and it's been over a month now. I know they received the letters, I have all my green cards filed. Should I send them each a letter giving them a little nudge, or just outright let them know their time has expired, and they obviously have no proof the debts are mine, and they need to stop reporting on them?

 

If someone else has already asked this, I'm sorry. But I don't want to stop now when I've already had such a successful start.

 

Thanks so much for the help!

 

CA's aren't required to reply to DV's,

 

 

Second, Ca's are required to reply to Dv's, but they're just not under any time restraints. Common mis-interpretation a lot of new people have. The only time restraint is the debtor responding to a dunning letter, which you have to do within 30 days. The CA will reply once they hear back from the OC (This can take several months.. or several weeks) depends on the CA and their communication with the OC, and how long it takes the OC to find documents you requested. Or you may never hear from them at all.

 

 

 

Wow - WRONG! CA's are NOT required to respond to DV's! Show me where it states CA's MUST reply.

 

I find it amazing that you assume a person knows nothing about something, and automatically assume they are new- based on the amount of posts they have. Just because a person is new to Credit Boards, it doesn't necessarily mean they know nothing about credit repair!

 

I don't want to start a spat, and will cease to inform others of what I did; should you offer some supportive documentation of that claim.

 

III. "Is it permissible under the FDCPA to cease collection of a debt rather than respond to a written dispute from a consumer received during the 30-day validation period?"

 

"Yes. There is nothing in the FDCPA that requires a debt collector to continue collecting a debt after a written dispute is received. Further, there is nothing in the FDCPA that requires a response to a written dispute if the debt collector chooses to abandon its collection effort with respect to the debt at issue. See Smith v. Transworld Systems, Inc., 953 F.2d 1025, 1032 (6th Cir. 1992)."

 

IV. "Would the following action by a debt collector constitute continued collection activity under § 1692g(: reporting a charged-off consumer debt to a consumer reporting agency as disputed in accordance with § 1692e(8), when the debt collector became aware of the dispute when the consumer sent a written dispute to the debt collector during the 30-day validation period, and no verification of the debt has been provided by the debt collector?"

http://creditboards.com/forums/index.php?s...d=3961933

"Yes. As stated in our answer to Question II, we view reporting to a consumer reporting agency as a collection activity prohibited by § 1692g( after a written dispute is received and no verification has been provided. Again, however, a debt collector must report a dispute received after a debt has been reported under § 1692e(8)."

 

http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/fdcpa/letters/cass.htm

 

ETA: Typo error.

Edited November 20, 2009 by no100player

[no100player]

"We interpret the ‘‘thirty-day period’’ as a period within which consumers must dispute their debts in writing in order to avail themselves

of their Section 809( B ) rights, but not as a ‘‘grace’’ period. Thus, we believe that there is nothing in the Act that prevents you from filing

suit during this period, so long as you do not make any representations that contradict Section 809( B )."

 

LeFevre-Berger

 

Edit: The ( B )'s show as smiley faces when there isn 't a break in the text.

Edited November 20, 2009 by no100player

[encoder]

Oh come on, this is a distinction without a difference.

 

You are right, no, a CA does not have to reply to a DV if they chose instead to abandon collection of the debt. You get all accusatory, in huge font, as if you're posting a huge "gotcha" but really you're offering nothing to the OP.

 

In this case, these TLs are still on the OPs report.

 

Let me try to answer:

1. I'm with Cinna in her general point that you should wait for the CRAs to finish their dispute process and see what you get deleted and what you're left with.

2. If they don't delete them, then yes, send them a MOV request. My gut says, sure, include copies of green cards, but they're not going to do anything with them. A copy of a green card doesn't prove that they didn't reply to the request. However, just asking them to explain their MOV seems to have netted some deletions... The value of those green cards would be if the CRA comes back and says "They verified the debt and here's how they did it...." Then either the CRA is lying or the CA racked up yet another FDCPA violation.

3. Past that, you send a letter to the CA informing them that they've violated federal law and you demand that they cease collection activity and remove the TL from your reports.

 

I'm still a new to much of this, but I'm in the middle of these steps myself and I've created this plan for myself and gotten a lot of help and guidance from people here that know their stuff.

 

My smell test has always put Beli in the category of somebody worth listening to. I think you will too going forward.

[no100player]

Oh come on, this is a distinction without a difference.

 

You are right, no, a CA does not have to reply to a DV if they chose instead to abandon collection of the debt. You get all accusatory, in huge font, as if you're posting a huge "gotcha" but really you're offering nothing to the OP.

 

In this case, these TLs are still on the OPs report.

 

Let me try to answer:

1. I'm with Cinna in her general point that you should wait for the CRAs to finish their dispute process and see what you get deleted and what you're left with.

2. If they don't delete them, then yes, send them a MOV request. My gut says, sure, include copies of green cards, but they're not going to do anything with them. A copy of a green card doesn't prove that they didn't reply to the request. However, just asking them to explain their MOV seems to have netted some deletions... The value of those green cards would be if the CRA comes back and says "They verified the debt and here's how they did it...." Then either the CRA is lying or the CA racked up yet another FDCPA violation.

3. Past that, you send a letter to the CA informing them that they've violated federal law and you demand that they cease collection activity and remove the TL from your reports.

 

I'm still a new to much of this, but I'm in the middle of these steps myself and I've created this plan for myself and gotten a lot of help and guidance from people here that know their stuff.

 

My smell test has always put Beli in the category of somebody worth listening to. I think you will too going forward.

 

AND what Federal law was violated?

 

Edit: Oh, and what I am offering to the OP is a different opinion on the reading the FDCPA!

Edited November 20, 2009 by no100player

[no100player]

Of course I COULD be completely wrong and some new case law has came out that states a CA MUST respond to a DV.

 

Edit: Oh yeah, forgot to mention, I only know of TX where a CA must reply to a DV (just to state, before someone includes that).

Edited November 20, 2009 by no100player

[beli]

Hi All,

 

Ok I have read and read and read, but for some reason at this point I'm not really sure what my next step should be. If someone could just point me in the right direction I would appreciate it so much.

 

I got my CRs about a month ago and disputed a total of 10 baddies (not all of them showing up on every report, but 10 in total). Five of them were deleted right away from TransUnion, although I haven't heard anything from Experian or Equifax yet. Another I received a letter from the CA stating the account had been closed, and when I sent a letter stating this to TransUnion they said that account isn't even listed on my report (weird, because I know it is or why would I have disputed it?)

 

I haven't heard back (validating the debt to be mine or otherwise) from any of the CA agencies, and it's been over a month now. I know they received the letters, I have all my green cards filed. Should I send them each a letter giving them a little nudge, or just outright let them know their time has expired, and they obviously have no proof the debts are mine, and they need to stop reporting on them?

 

If someone else has already asked this, I'm sorry. But I don't want to stop now when I've already had such a successful start.

 

Thanks so much for the help!

 

CA's aren't required to reply to DV's,

 

 

Second, Ca's are required to reply to Dv's, but they're just not under any time restraints. Common mis-interpretation a lot of new people have. The only time restraint is the debtor responding to a dunning letter, which you have to do within 30 days. The CA will reply once they hear back from the OC (This can take several months.. or several weeks) depends on the CA and their communication with the OC, and how long it takes the OC to find documents you requested. Or you may never hear from them at all.

 

 

 

Wow - WRONG! CA's are NOT required to respond to DV's! Show me where it states CA's MUST reply.

 

I find it amazing that you assume a person knows nothing about something, and automatically assume they are new- based on the amount of posts they have. Just because a person is new to Credit Boards, it doesn't necessarily mean they know nothing about credit repair!

 

I don't want to start a spat, and will cease to inform others of what I did; should you offer some supportive documentation of that claim.

 

III. "Is it permissible under the FDCPA to cease collection of a debt rather than respond to a written dispute from a consumer received during the 30-day validation period?"

 

"Yes. There is nothing in the FDCPA that requires a debt collector to continue collecting a debt after a written dispute is received. Further, there is nothing in the FDCPA that requires a response to a written dispute if the debt collector chooses to abandon its collection effort with respect to the debt at issue. See Smith v. Transworld Systems, Inc., 953 F.2d 1025, 1032 (6th Cir. 1992)."

 

IV. "Would the following action by a debt collector constitute continued collection activity under § 1692g(: reporting a charged-off consumer debt to a consumer reporting agency as disputed in accordance with § 1692e(8), when the debt collector became aware of the dispute when the consumer sent a written dispute to the debt collector during the 30-day validation period, and no verification of the debt has been provided by the debt collector?"

http://creditboards.com/forums/index.php?s...d=3961933

"Yes. As stated in our answer to Question II, we view reporting to a consumer reporting agency as a collection activity prohibited by § 1692g( after a written dispute is received and no verification has been provided. Again, however, a debt collector must report a dispute received after a debt has been reported under § 1692e(8)."

 

http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/fdcpa/letters/cass.htm

 

ETA: Typo error.

Directly FROM Fair Debit Collection Practice Act:

809. Validation of debts

(a) Within five days after the initial communication with a consumer in connection with the collection of any debt, a debt collector shall, unless the following information is contained in the initial communication or the consumer has paid the debt, send the consumer a written notice containing—

(1) the amount of the debt;

(2) the name of the creditor to whom the debt is owed;

(3) a statement that unless the consumer, within thirty days after receipt of the notice, disputes the validity of the debt, or any portion thereof, the debt will be assumed to be valid by the debt collector;

(4) a statement that if the consumer notifies the debt collector

in writing within the thirty-day period that the debt, or any portion thereof, is disputed, the debt collector

will obtain verification of the debt or a copy of a judgment against the consumer and a copy of such verification or judgment will be mailed to the consumer by the debt collector; and

(5) a statement that, upon the consumer’s written request within the thirty-day period, the debt collector will provide the consumer with the name and address of the original creditor, if different from the current creditor.

( If the consumer notifies the debt collector in writing within the thirty-day period described in subsection (a) that the debt, or any portion thereof, is disputed, or that the consumer

requests the name and address of the original credi15

USC 1692g

12

§ 809 15 USC 1692g

tor, the debt collector shall cease collection of the debt, or any disputed portion thereof, until the debt collector obtains verification of the debt or any copy of a judgment, or the name and address of the original creditor, and a copy of such verification or judgment, or name and address of the original creditor, is mailed to the consumer by the debt collector. Collection activities and communications that do not otherwise violate this title may continue during the 30-day period referred to in subsection (a) unless the consumer has notified the debt collector in writing that the debt, or any portion of the debt, is disputed or that the consumer

requests the name and address of the original creditor.

Any collection activities and communication during the 30-day period may not overshadow or be inconsistent with the disclosure of the consumer’s right to dispute the debt or request the name and address of the original creditor.

© The failure of a consumer to dispute the validity of a debt under this section may not be construed by any court as an admission of liability by the consumer.

(d) A communication in the form of a formal pleading in a civil action shall not be treated as an initial communication for purposes of subsection (a).

(e) The sending or delivery of any form or notice which does not relate to the collection of a debt and is expressly required by the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, title V of Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, or any provision of Federal or State law relating to notice of data security breach or privacy,

or any regulation prescribed under any such provision of law, shall not be treated as an initial communication in connection with debt collection for purposes of this section

Edited November 20, 2009 by beli

[cinnamngrl]

reporting an account to. Cra is a collection activity

 

So if the ca chooses to not respond to dv letter, the tradeline must be deleted or not initiated

 

Include green receipts!

[encoder]

AND what Federal law was violated?

 

The FDCPA is a federal law.

 

And, please tell me, what's with the confrontation here? You get a thread with 20 "regulars" on this board and you'll get 20 different opinions, nearly all of them valid and worthwhile.

Edited November 20, 2009 by encoder

[clutchmastercory]

And in NC

 

http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/Sessions/2009/.../PDF/S974v5.pdf

 

lil helpful animal I was pointed out to today

Edited November 20, 2009 by clutchmastercory

[no100player]

LoL, you guys are missing the point. A CA is not required to respond to a DV, period. There is NOTHING in the FDCPA thast states a CA must do so.

 

The bottom line is, just because a debt hasn't been validated, it doesn't necessarily mean that the CA is reporting false information to the CRA's And to report that a debt IS disputed is not a false claim! I know it sucks, but that's they way it is.

 

"Section 807(8) prohibits "Communicating or threatening to communicate to any person [false] credit information . . ., including the failure to communicate that a disputed debt is disputed."

 

1. Disputed debt. If a debt collector knows that a debt is disputed by the consumer, either from receipt of written notice (section 809) or other means, and reports it to a credit bureau, he must report it as disputed.

 

2. Post-report dispute. When a debt collector learns of a dispute after reporting the debt to a credit bureau, the dispute need not also be reported."

 

EDIT: Forgot quotation marks and source: http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/fdcpa/commentary.htm

Edited November 20, 2009 by no100player

[no100player]

AND what Federal law was violated?

 

The FDCPA is a federal law.

 

And, please tell me, what's with the confrontation here? You get a thread with 20 "regulars" on this board and you'll get 20 different opinions, nearly all of them valid and worthwhile.

 

I'm not trying to be confrontational at all. I'm simply informing the OP that a CA doesn't have to ever reply to a DV, before he/she wastes more money on CMRRR letter that is full of demands that cannot be enforced.

Edited November 20, 2009 by no100player

[encoder]

LoL, you guys are missing the point. A CA is not required to respond to a DV, period. There is NOTHING in the FDCPA thast states a CA must do so.

 

 

Again, why the shtty attiude? Really, man?

 

On point...

 

If they don't validate, they cannot continue collection activity. Keeping a CA TL on a report is a collection activity.

 

What's the issue here? You are right, they don't have to respond, if they chose to just delete the TL and cease collections. That's the whole point of what everybody is doing here! I'm not seeking validation to force a CA to waste 40 cents worth of toner. I'm doing it to get the item deleted. If they validate, or chose not to validate in lieu of deletion, then I win.

 

And let me close by adding, what's with the shtty attitude?

[cinnamngrl]

Reporting is collection activity

The dv letter is not a dispute (only) it is request for the evidence of the debt as described by law. The ca doesn't have to respond but must cease collection activity until they do

 

 

Wow my crackberry is soslow I can't tell when people already stuck up for me. Can we just be happy it is friday

Edited November 20, 2009 by cinnamngrl

[beli]

Rabideau v. Management Adjustment Bureau, 805 F.Supp, 1086 (at 1092) states that “If the consumer disputes the debt or requests, in writing, the name of the original creditor, then the collector must halt all collection efforts until it sends verification of the debt or the creditor’s name to the consumer. 15 U.S.C. Section 1692g(. However, absent such dispute or notification during the thirty day validation period, the debt collector may continue its collection efforts. “While continuing efforts to collect debt may occur within 30-day validation period provided under Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), those efforts must terminate for at least that period from date validation demand is received by debt collector, within the 30-day period, until date that information demanded is provided to debtor.

Edited November 20, 2009 by beli

[no100player]

Okay, there must be some major confusion in this thread.

 

Specifically what I have been referring to is a DV sent after the 30 days window, and I will stand by what I have been saying!

 

And as for you Encocder, it's getting a little old now with you repeatedly stating I have a crap attitude. I couldn't give a damn what you say/think of my attitude or your personal attacks. Your comments actually make me laugh, I suppose you surround yourself with people who only agree with everything you say because apparently anyone who disagrees has a "shtty attitude", LoL.

[no100player]

Rabideau v. Management Adjustment Bureau, 805 F.Supp, 1086 (at 1092) states that “If the consumer disputes the debt or requests, in writing, the name of the original creditor, then the collector must halt all collection efforts until it sends verification of the debt or the creditor’s name to the consumer. 15 U.S.C. Section 1692g(. However, absent such dispute or notification during the thirty day validation period, the debt collector may continue its collection efforts. “While continuing efforts to collect debt may occur within 30-day validation period provided under Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), those efforts must terminate for at least that period from date validation demand is received by debt collector, within the 30-day period, until date that information demanded is provided to debtor.

 

I haven't been talking about that, only DV's outside the 30 day window of a dunning letter (I thought this was common knowledge, LoL).

 

If a DV is sent after the 30 days has past, then the consumer is SOL (and I'm not referring to the Statute of Limitations).

[cinnamngrl]

I don't really know how anyone could realize that no100 was talking about a non DV letter. It isn't a dv if you are late.

 

But I would point out that many CAs fail to send notice as law requires. I have never received notice by any kind of cert mail.

 

This is why they almost always respond to the late dv. They can't call it late if they can't prove they sent the notice.

Edited November 20, 2009 by cinnamngrl

[no100player]

I don't really know how anyone could realize that no100 was talking about a non DV letter. It isn't a dv if you are late.

 

But I would point out that many CAs fail to send notice as law requires. I have never received notice by any kind of cert mail.

 

This is why they almost always respond to the late dv. They can't call it late if they can't prove they sent the notice.

 

Huh?

 

Edit: What are you talking about non DV letter? I've been talking about a DV the entire time.

Edited November 20, 2009 by no100player

[encoder]

Okay, there must be some major confusion in this thread.

 

Specifically what I have been referring to is a DV sent after the 30 days window, and I will stand by what I have been saying!

 

And as for you Encocder, it's getting a little old now with you repeatedly stating I have a crap attitude. I couldn't give a damn what you say/think of my attitude or your personal attacks. Your comments actually make me laugh, I suppose you surround yourself with people who only agree with everything you say because apparently anyone who disagrees has a "shtty attitude", LoL.

 

Calling you out for being cocky isn't an attack. It's just the truth. I didn't tell you what I really think of you based on said attitude, just that you most certainly have one. Here's a tip: When You disagree with somebody a pop an "LoL" in there, it comes across on here every bit as childish as it would if you laughed while arguing with somebody face to face. Probably more so because the internet makes no allowance for any personal charm. This is a really great community with a lot of longtime members, I promise you, you would be amazed at how much you could learn here with an ounce of humility.

[encoder]

I don't really know how anyone could realize that no100 was talking about a non DV letter. It isn't a dv if you are late.

 

But I would point out that many CAs fail to send notice as law requires. I have never received notice by any kind of cert mail.

 

This is why they almost always respond to the late dv. They can't call it late if they can't prove they sent the notice.

 

Huh?

 

Edit: What are you talking about non DV letter? I've been talking about a DV the entire time.

 

She's talking about Untimely DV.

[cinnamngrl]

I don't really know how anyone could realize that no100 was talking about a non DV letter. It isn't a dv if you are late.

 

But I would point out that many CAs fail to send notice as law requires. I have never received notice by any kind of cert mail.

 

This is why they almost always respond to the late dv. They can't call it late if they can't prove they sent the notice.

 

Huh?

 

Edit: What are you talking about non DV letter? I've been talking about a DV the entire time.

 

She's talking about Untimely DV.

 

Yes you see technically an untimely DV is not a DV letter at all. That is why no one knew what you were going on about.

 

But that being said, for a CA to get away with ignoring your non DV letter they would need some proof that they gave you notice that they were seeking to collect the debt. This proof could be certified mail receipt OR evidence of response from you. A letter, etc. The way the collection business works they can't afford to notice everyone by CMRRR. and I am pointing it out because it is the only way I could offer some helpful advice after all your convoluted arguing, no100. lol, happy friday

Edited November 20, 2009 by cinnamngrl