Funny CA Story

[ashlia]

First, i don't advicate using the phones when it comes to dealing with a CA. With that said, when/if they call me at work, I always hook them up to the recording equipment(work at a radio station) and have a little fun with them.

 

Back story:

I sent an particular CA a Demand for Validation invoking my rights under the Texas Finance Code on March 9th. By Texas law, the CA must respond within thirty days or they have to delete the tradeline(per my request). This CA has not responded, and has not deleted. Their Registered Agent got my ITS letter on Thursday of last week...

 

Fast forward to today. I get a call at work(violation) from a CSR named Jessica. Nice girl. I hook her up to the recorder, listen to her spill, then inform her of TFC392, the fact that CA failed to delete and that RA received my ITS on Thursday. She connects me to a Supervisor named Liz.

 

Liz goes through her spill, I recount the vilation of TFC, the dates they received/signed for letters, ect...We go through this for about 5 minutes, she continuously argues about TFC...finally...I am telling her again about TFC when she interupts me:

 

CSR Supervisor: Ms. Ashlia, I am very, very aware of the Texas Finance Code, infact if there are any changes to it, i am updated daily. I am totally aware of the laws and how they work.

Me: Really? I find that very curious. I would think if you are so aware of the Texas Finance Code, you would have provided the validation required for this alleged debt within the thirty days provided the by the TFC, instead of failing to do so.

CSR Supervisor: Uh, well, uh, uh...

Me: Your registered agent received my ITS on Thursday, the case will be filed in XXX county court on June 4th. You have a good day. CLICK!

 

Now that made me laugh! Hope you also enjoy.

 

ETA: Quick typing makes for bad spelling! Sorry everyone.

Edited April 18, 2011 by ashlia

[uncoder2010]

Nice! Makes me want to move to Texas!

 

The marital property state I'm in makes everything harder and it's very cold!

[JunkBuyersWorstNightmare]

First, i don't advicate using the phones when it comes to dealing with a CA. With that said, when/if they call me at work, I always hook them up to the recording equipment(work at a radio station) and have a little fun with them.

 

Back story:

I sent an particular CA a Demand for Validation invoking my rights under the Texas Finance Code on March 9th. By Texas law, the CA must respond within thirty days or they have to delete the tradeline(per my request). This CA has not responded, and has not deleted. Their Registered Agent got my ITS letter on Thursday of last week...

 

Fast forward to today. I get a call at work(violation) from a CSR named Jessica. Nice girl. I hook her up to the recorder, listen to her spill, then inform her of TFC392, the fact that CA failed to delete and that RA received my ITS on Thursday. She connects me to a Supervisor named Liz.

 

Liz goes through her spill, I recount the vilation of TFC, the dates they received/signed for letters, ect...We go through this for about 5 minutes, she continuously argues about TFC...finally...I am telling her again about TFC when she interupts me:

 

CSR Supervisor: Ms. Ashlia, I am very, very aware of the Texas Finance Code, infact if there are any changes to it, i am updated daily. I am totally aware of the laws and how they work.

Me: Really? I find that very curious. I would think if you are so aware of the Texas Finance Code, you would have provided the validation required for this alleged debt within the thirty days provided the by the TFC, instead of failing to do so.

CSR Supervisor: Uh, well, uh, uh...

Me: Your registered agent received my ITS on Thursday, the case will be filed in XXX county court on June 4th. You have a good day. CLICK!

 

Now that made me laugh! Hope you also enjoy.

 

ETA: Quick typing makes for bad spelling! Sorry everyone.

 

[Texastarz]

I so want to know how they respond to your ITS...hurry up calendar!

[ashlia]

You and Me both! This is actually a different CA...I sent out three ITS the week before last...

I'll keep you updated!

 

'

I so want to know how they respond to your ITS...hurry up calendar!

[Texastarz]

If they dont respond, will you list all 3 as defendants on the same suit? (I'm thinking of doing to same for Asset, Midland and Enhanced)

[ashlia]

No. I will do them separately. Each one has committed different violations, and they each have slightly different 60 day deadlines...

If they dont respond, will you list all 3 as defendants on the same suit? (I'm thinking of doing to same for Asset, Midland and Enhanced)

Edited April 18, 2011 by ashlia

[T77125]

The words FUNNY & CA Don't go in the same sentence unless it goes like this. I saw somthing so funny today, a CA was set on fire & was burnt alive he/she is dead now & I laughed my flowers off at how funny it was.

[Texastarz]

No. I will do them separately. Each one has committed different violations, and they each have slightly different 60 day deadlines...

If they dont respond, will you list all 3 as defendants on the same suit? (I'm thinking of doing to same for Asset, Midland and Enhanced)

 

Ok..yes, that makes sense!

 

The words FUNNY & CA Don't go in the same sentence unless it goes like this. I saw somthing so funny today, a CA was set on fire & was burnt alive he/she is dead now & I laughed my flowers off at how funny it was.

 

Thomas J...smh SMH!

[ashlia]

Update: This funny lady sent a "validation" letter the very same day we talked on the phone it said:

 

"Per your request in ourt recent conversation, I have sent proof of validity of this debt..."

 

My response was a letter that said:

 

"I received your letter dated XXX, however, I did not request validation during our conversation. If you have questions about the content of that conversation, I would be happy to provide you with an audio recording of same.

 

Please see the enclosed materials, which were sent to your Registered Agent, and received and signed for on April 4th, 2011. Have a great day!"

 

Received a dunning letter too, it was sent the day AFTER the conversation, my response to that letter will be much the same...too bad you guys weren't able to do it in the thirty days provided by law. See ya in court, losers.

[ashlia]

I should mention, both Texas, and Oklahoma(where the CA is located) are one party recording states, and yes I do have the convo recorded.

[ashlia]

Just looked over the dunning letter...three violations of TFC right there. Hell, I hope they send me a hundred letters...they are making my case so much easier to prove.

[ashlia]

This is my response to the dunning letter...

 

 

I received a dunning letter sent by douche bag CA dated April 19th, 2011, late last week.

Again, pursuant to Texas Finance Code 392, a collection agency ONLY has thirty days to respond to a Texas consumer who disputes a debt. I disputed this alleged debt in early March, and the dispute was received and signed for in your offices on March 9th, 2011. douche bag CA failed to respond to this letter, and only sent materials to me after a phone conversation with you on April 18th, 2011, when I pointed out the violation of the TFC.

On Friday, April 21, 2011, I sent a packet of documentation to you. Those documents were sent to your Registered Agent, CT Corporation, on April 12, 2011 and signed for and received on April 14th. Notice to the Registered Agent is notice to the Principal.

In addition, in the dunning letter, I noticed douche bag CA has added a $35 charge to the alleged debt. This is a violation of the Texas Finance Code 392.303(2). This is also misrepresentation of the debt, a violation of TFC392.304(8). I also have questions about the true business name of douche bag CA, on several occasions, the business has been represented as "different douche bag CA", this is a violation of TFC392.304(1a). The lawsuit to be filed in XXXX County Court will be amended to reflect these additional violations.

Further, the materials you sent on the 18th of April, show that this alleged debt is from January 22, 2007, making this debt outside of the statute of limitations to collect for the state of Texas, which pursuant to Texas law is only four years. I am a resident of Texas.

Have a great day,

Ashlia

 

And this was my response to the "validation" they provided, 11 days too late.

 

 

Dear Ms. Jackson:

 

I received the letter you sent dated April 18th, 2011, however, I did not request validation during our phone conversation on the same date. If you have questions about the conversation, I would be happy to provide you with an audio recording of the call.

Please see the enclosed materials, which were sent to your Registered Agent on April 12, 2011 and received and signed for on April 14, 2011. Notice to the Registered Agent is notice to the Principal.

Sincerely,

Ashlia

[ashlia]

Just received letter number three! Same as the first, validation(too little, too late buddy). This time, it came from the Account Officer, however the president of the company's name is given. No signature, just typed.

 

I wonder how many violations this letter will have?

 

I think tomorrow I will send them a combination of response letters one and two. This is getting fun!

[ashlia]

It just keeps getting better!

 

According to the SOS, they "forfieted their charter for non-payment of franchise taxes."

 

The SOS can't give legal advice, but the lady said "I don't give legal advice, and can't say for sure, but I if you go to a lawyer, it could be favorable for you."

[JunkBuyersWorstNightmare]

It just keeps getting better!

 

According to the SOS, they "forfieted their charter for non-payment of franchise taxes."

 

The SOS can't give legal advice, but the lady said "I don't give legal advice, and can't say for sure, but I if you go to a lawyer, it could be favorable for you."

 

[Kavey]

The words FUNNY & CA Don't go in the same sentence unless it goes like this. I saw somthing so funny today, a CA was set on fire & was burnt alive he/she is dead now & I laughed my flowers off at how funny it was.

 

Anybody dying is not a very funny thing.. I dont care what they did.. no man should determine their fate.

 

 

As far as recording the conversations where did you find a decent recorder. I would love to get one.

[ashlia]

The words FUNNY & CA Don't go in the same sentence unless it goes like this. I saw somthing so funny today, a CA was set on fire & was burnt alive he/she is dead now & I laughed my flowers off at how funny it was.

 

Anybody dying is not a very funny thing.. I dont care what they did.. no man should determine their fate.

 

 

As far as recording the conversations where did you find a decent recorder. I would love to get one.

 

I work at a radio station. For whatever reason, they usually call that number. I put them on hold and transfer them to the hotline, then record the call through a telso system. I am talking to them through a microphone and they have no clue...

[cprems]

This now opens the Corporation up to a can of whoop a$$ they cannot defend. I sent you a PM regarding this issue.

 

 

It just keeps getting better!

 

According to the SOS, they "forfieted their charter for non-payment of franchise taxes."

 

The SOS can't give legal advice, but the lady said "I don't give legal advice, and can't say for sure, but I if you go to a lawyer, it could be favorable for you."

[Rebuilding2010]

The words FUNNY & CA Don't go in the same sentence unless it goes like this. I saw somthing so funny today, a CA was set on fire & was burnt alive he/she is dead now & I laughed my flowers off at how funny it was.

 

Anybody dying is not a very funny thing.. I dont care what they did.. no man should determine their fate.

Yeah I never understood people that say things that, if looked at objectively or you know in any way at all, are absolutely psycho (someone was set on fire and burned alive and you laughed? what was funnier, the smell of burning flesh? the screams as they died? Oh.. oh.. you didn't like what they did for a living.... ok... well um.... *dials 911*.. yeah no it was a joke totally, haha, I get it... *hello operator?*).

 

Good for you for speaking up.

[pryan67]

Just received letter number three! Same as the first, validation(too little, too late buddy). This time, it came from the Account Officer, however the president of the company's name is given. No signature, just typed.

 

I wonder how many violations this letter will have?

 

I think tomorrow I will send them a combination of response letters one and two. This is getting fun!

 

 

 

When you say they gave the president's name...do you mean he "signed" the letter with his signature at the bottom, or did they simply say "oh, by the way, our president's name is John Scuzzball"?

 

 

If the former, then they have ZERO defense...they can't say "well, our CSR was new and still in training, sorry about that"

[ashlia]

No signature(darn it). It looks like this:

 

Sincerely,

 

Scumbag douche

Account Officer

 

But I have been looking this company up for weeks, and on everything I find, Scumbag Douche, is listed as Vice President of Operations(ooops, meant VP when I said President).

 

I am going to send a "go for the jugular" letter today.

 

And, For the Record: I didn't write that about the CA collector dying. I agree, not funny.

 

Just received letter number three! Same as the first, validation(too little, too late buddy). This time, it came from the Account Officer, however the president of the company's name is given. No signature, just typed.

 

I wonder how many violations this letter will have?

 

I think tomorrow I will send them a combination of response letters one and two. This is getting fun!

 

 

 

When you say they gave the president's name...do you mean he "signed" the letter with his signature at the bottom, or did they simply say "oh, by the way, our president's name is John Scuzzball"?

 

 

If the former, then they have ZERO defense...they can't say "well, our CSR was new and still in training, sorry about that"

[Rebuilding2010]

No you didn't, didn't mean to thread jack either, sorry

[ashlia]

Here is the body of the letter I wrote to wireless router Collect. Please note, this is only the body of the letter, and any format glitches are just the result of the copy/paste function on my work computer.

I received the third letter in as many days from Douche yesterday, the 25^th of April, 2011. I appreciate you responding personally to my correspondence, however I have never spoken with you on the phone, as you demonstrate in the letter, and did not request validation during my phone conversation with Douche Rep on April 18th. If you have questions about that call, I would be happy to provide you with an audio recording.

 

I have several concerns I would like to share with you. First, I spoke with a Representative with the Office of the Texas Secretary of State yesterday. According to same, Douche did not pay the Texas franchise taxes they are required to pay during 2011. For that reason, Douche has forfeited their charter in Texas, and is subject to a law suit from the Texas Attorney General.

 

Second, the materials you sent to me both on April 18^th and April 21^st contained information from the Original Creditor demonstrating this alleged debt was incurred between December 2006, and January 22, 2007. As you are no doubt aware, I am a Texas resident, and the statute of limitations to collect a debt alleged of a Texas consumer is only four years. This alleged debt is outside of the collectible statute of limitations.

 

Third, Douche has committed numerous violations of the Texas Finance Code. Pursuant to Texas Finance Code 392, a collection agency ONLY has thirty days to respond to a Texas consumer who disputes a debt. I disputed this alleged debt in early March, and the dispute was received and signed for in your offices on March 9^th, 2011. Douche failed to respond to this letter, and only sent materials to me after a phone conversation with Ms. Jackson, on April 18^th, 2011, when I pointed out the violation of the TFC. In addition, in the dunning letter sent April 19, 2011, I noticed Douche has added a $35 charge to the alleged debt. This is a violation of the Texas Finance Code 392.303(2). This is also misrepresentation of the debt, a violation of TFC392.304(8). I also have questions about the true business name of Douche, on several occasions, the business has been represented as Other Douche, this is a violation of TFC392.304(1a).

 

Enclosed, you will find information that was sent to Douche via Registered Agent, XXXX, and was received and signed for on April 14^th. Notice to the Registered Agent is notice to the Principal. The same materials were also forwarded to Travelers, and were received and signed for on April 18, 2011. The complaint to be filed in XXXX County Court has been amended to reflect the additional violations of the Texas Finance Code.

 

 

A very generous settlement offer has been laid out within these documents. This settlement offer is valid for 10 days from the receipt of this letter. Once this 10 day window has passed, no other settlement will be entertained, and I will move forward with the lawsuit to be filed in XXXX County Court. I will also be forced to notify the Texas Attorney General of the many TFC violations committed by Douche. The violations, coupled with the failure to pay Texas franchise taxes during 2011, will likely be of great interest to the Division of Consumer Protection.

 

 

This communication does not authorize your company to pull my credit report-whether "soft" or "hard"-from any credit reporting agency.

 

If you have any questions, you may contact me at the address below. Phone calls to my home, cell or work phone numbers are inconvenient.

 

Sincerely,

 

Ashlia

Address

Edited April 26, 2011 by ashlia

[ashlia]

No problem!

 

No you didn't, didn't mean to thread jack either, sorry