Debt Validation not responded to

[EDub357]

Greetings,

I sent a debt collector a debt validation letter, and specifically noted that I did not want a mere verification that they had my name and address.  I was very specific with my request.  They responded a couple of days later, stating that they received my request and would forward the information once they received it.  That, in itself, to me seems funny, because I was under the impression that the information they are reporting should be already on file with their company.  They had to reach out to the OC for any information. Then, a few days later I received another letter with a  verification, but did not respond to the validation request.  They also did not address the other requests that were made in my initial letter to them.

Now, my question is, what would my next step be, if they did not validate the debt. What grounds to I have to demand an immediate deletion from the CRA?  Should I forward all communications to  the CRA?

[RobertEG]

Requests for debt validation, if they are timely (meaning they are sent within 30 days of dunning notice, or prior to any dunning notice) , impose a cease collection bar on the debt collector, which remains in effect until such time as they choose to send validation.

There is no period for or requirement to send any validation.

A debt collector becomes in violation of the FDCPA if the consumer sent a timely DV, and the debt collector thereafter resumes active collection activities without having sent validation.

If you receive what you consider to be inadequate validation, you are effectively asserting that the debt collector remains under a cease collection bar.

You can then bring legal action for violation of their cease collection bar under FDCPA 809(b) once they make any action that violates the cease collection bar.

Not all items that a consumer requests are required to be provided as part of adequate debt validation.

FDCPA 809(b) does not specifically require any written documentation in support of a finding of verification, leaving the interpretation on a case by case basis to the courts.

Case law in most jurisdictions usually only requires their investigation and statement that they have verified. 

Deletion of credit reporting is not mandated by lack of adequate debt validation.

The CRAs are not a party to the DV process, as it is a debt collection practices matter between the consumer and the debt collector.

Lack of validation is not basis for disputing the accuracy of a reported collection.