DV/ Settlement Offer Response

[creditstalker]

I sent a DV letter to Best Service Collection,  and instead of them sending back information validating the debt,  they sent an offer letter.  How should I respond or Handle this situation?

[gdale6]

---

@creditstalker wrote:

I sent a DV letter to Best Service Collection,  and instead of them sending back information validating the debt,  they sent an offer letter.  How should I respond or Handle this situation?

---

Unless you live in TX, to be timely a DV must be sent within the first 30 days a collector gets a debt, this puts them under a cease collection activity bar until they do validate and their is no time limit for a response. If the DV is sent at any other time they do not have to validate or respond, they are obviously not going to validate and have responded with the offer instead. If this is updating monthly on your CRs and its within the SOL I would advise you to settle.

[creditstalker]

I live in Texas,  does that make a difference

[gdale6]

---

@creditstalker wrote:

I live in Texas,  does that make a difference

---

Why yes it does. Texas has their own rules under the TX Finance Law. A DV must be answered in TX at ANY time. I would resend the DV referencing the TX Finance Law and if they still refuse to send you the validation you are requesting then you would file a formal complaint with the states AG. I would also see if they are licensed to collect in TX that is another law under the TX Finance Code.

[RobertEG]

If you send a debt validation letter and dont identify it as being under the provisions of the TX Financial Code, no, there is not resonse requirement for residents of TX.

A debt validtion letter under the FDCPA  applies equally to residents of all states.

To be entitled to any of the provisions f the TX Financial Code, you must specifically identiy your letter as beng under that state statute, not the FDCPA.

Additionally, requests under the TX Financial Code do not require validatino within the 30-day period, they only require response.

They can respond that they are not yet providing validation.  If they state that they are not yet providing validation, they then remain under the cease collection bar, and must also delete their reported collection, but can resinsert once they provide validation.

[go_FICO_self]

That seems strange: if the law is out there why would the letter need to invoke it for it to apply?

[Anonymous]

---

@go_FICO_self wrote:
That seems strange: if the law is out there why would the letter need to invoke it for it to apply?

---

Because they are based in Los Angeles, and may not even be aware of the Texas Financial Code.

[go_FICO_self]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@go_FICO_self wrote:
That seems strange: if the law is out there why would the letter need to invoke it for it to apply?

---

Because they are based in Los Angeles, and may not even be aware of the Texas Financial Code.

---

the burden is on them to know every law (just as it is for the consumer).

you might've said instead that they don't know if the law *applies* to this particular consumer. but if they're mailing to TX then it should be a good indication.