Have A Few Questions About DV Letters

[guiness56]

---

@jramos402 wrote:

Heres a copy of the letter I finally came up with and will be sending off here in a few days. Just wanted opinions on it. Maybe Im missing something else I could be asking for them to send me for verification. Ive been looking on the Texas SOS website and a few of the CAs Im sending this letter to arent bonded here in Texas. Is there any chance that after receiving this letter they sell the debt off to another CA that IS bonded in Texas just to make some money off of it?? Here is the letter:

 To Whom It May Concern:

I recently pulled a copy of my credit bureau reports and discovered that you claim I owe you a debt. Be advised, this is not a refusal to pay, but a notice sent pursuant to the Texas Finance Code Sec. 392.202 that validation is requested.

This is NOT a request for “verification” or proof of my mailing address, but a request for VALIDATION made pursuant to the above named Title and Section. I respectfully request that your office provide me with competent evidence that I have any legal obligation to pay you.

Please provide me with the following:

• The name of the original creditor
• The original date of default or non payment of the debt
• The date the debt was transferred from the original creditor to your agency
• The original balance
• The current balance
• Surety bond information as per Texas Finance Code Sec. 392.101

If your offices fail to respond to this validation request within 30 days from the date of your receipt, all references to this account must be deleted and completely removed from my credit file and a copy of such request shall be sent to me immediately.

Best Regards,

My Typed Name

---

Even under the TFC I am not certain they have to provide 2 and 3.

[RobertEG]

Under the TX code, issues of bodning are separate, and dont go to the issue of sending a "DV" related to the debt. If you have issues related to bonding or lack thereof, they are required to have filed a copy of their bond with the sec. of state, not the consumer. The consumer can get that info by contacting the office of the sec. of state. As for requiringments that they provide speicific information to suport their finding of validity ot the debt, neither the federal FDCPA nor the TX finnacial code have such a requirement. They are provided to make a statement, based on their investigation, as to the accuracy/validity. The reason is fairly apparent. Neither process has administrative law judges to decide what any documentation proves or disproves, or to require each side to present all documenattion so that any contested issues can be resolved. Thus, providing documentation is not part of either process. That is the job of the courts. What you get is their attestation that they have conducted an investigation that supports their finding. Neieht processes are legal fact-finding processes. ---------------------- Sec. 392.101. BOND REQUIREMENT. (a) A third-party debt collector or credit bureau may not engage in debt collection unless the third-party debt collector or credit bureau has obtained a surety bond issued by a surety company authorized to do business in this state as prescribed by this section. A copy of the bond must be filed with the secretary of state. Sec. 392.202. (b) Not later than the 30th day after the date a notice of inaccuracy is received, a third-party debt collector who initiates an investigation shall send a written statement to the individual: (1) denying the inaccuracy; (2) admitting the inaccuracy; or (3) stating that the third-party debt collector has not had sufficient time to complete an investigation of the inaccuracy. (c) If the third-party debt collector admits that the item is inaccurate under Subsection (b), the third-party debt collector shall: (1) not later than the fifth business day after the date of the admission, correct the item in the relevant file; and (2) immediately cease collection efforts related to the portion of the debt that was found to be inaccurate and on correction of the item

[jramos402]

---

@RobertEG wrote:
Under the TX code, issues of bodning are separate, and dont go to the issue of sending a "DV" related to the debt. If you have issues related to bonding or lack thereof, they are required to have filed a copy of their bond with the sec. of state, not the consumer. The consumer can get that info by contacting the office of the sec. of state. As for requiringments that they provide speicific information to suport their finding of validity ot the debt, neither the federal FDCPA nor the TX finnacial code have such a requirement. They are provided to make a statement, based on their investigation, as to the accuracy/validity. The reason is fairly apparent. Neither process has administrative law judges to decide what any documentation proves or disproves, or to require each side to present all documenattion so that any contested issues can be resolved. Thus, providing documentation is not part of either process. That is the job of the courts. What you get is their attestation that they have conducted an investigation that supports their finding. Neieht processes are legal fact-finding processes. ---------------------- Sec. 392.101. BOND REQUIREMENT. (a) A third-party debt collector or credit bureau may not engage in debt collection unless the third-party debt collector or credit bureau has obtained a surety bond issued by a surety company authorized to do business in this state as prescribed by this section. A copy of the bond must be filed with the secretary of state. Sec. 392.202. (b) Not later than the 30th day after the date a notice of inaccuracy is received, a third-party debt collector who initiates an investigation shall send a written statement to the individual: (1) denying the inaccuracy; (2) admitting the inaccuracy; or (3) stating that the third-party debt collector has not had sufficient time to complete an investigation of the inaccuracy. (c) If the third-party debt collector admits that the item is inaccurate under Subsection (b), the third-party debt collector shall: (1) not later than the fifth business day after the date of the admission, correct the item in the relevant file; and (2) immediately cease collection efforts related to the portion of the debt that was found to be inaccurate and on correction of the item

---

I have checked with the Secretary of State and 3 of the CAs do not have a bond here in Texas. Whas my play then? Demand they delete due to lack of surety bond with the state of Texas?

[RobertEG]

That would certainly be an option, as the code says they may not engage in collection in the state of TX without bonding.

Thus, you coud assert that their collection was unauthorized, and thus its reporting as a legit collection is inaccurate.

I would be helpful to at least get their response/verification on record to such a direct dispute, as they are required to conduct a reasonable investigation of your assertion and make a determination supported by that investigation.  If clearly not bonded, it would be interesting to see their response.

.

If they were to then verify, it would certainly reinforce any complaint to the CFPB, or civil action you might chose to initiate, and possibly serve as additional basis for violation of the FCRA.

[guiness56]

---

@jramos402 wrote:

---

@RobertEG wrote:
Under the TX code, issues of bodning are separate, and dont go to the issue of sending a "DV" related to the debt. If you have issues related to bonding or lack thereof, they are required to have filed a copy of their bond with the sec. of state, not the consumer. The consumer can get that info by contacting the office of the sec. of state. As for requiringments that they provide speicific information to suport their finding of validity ot the debt, neither the federal FDCPA nor the TX finnacial code have such a requirement. They are provided to make a statement, based on their investigation, as to the accuracy/validity. The reason is fairly apparent. Neither process has administrative law judges to decide what any documentation proves or disproves, or to require each side to present all documenattion so that any contested issues can be resolved. Thus, providing documentation is not part of either process. That is the job of the courts. What you get is their attestation that they have conducted an investigation that supports their finding. Neieht processes are legal fact-finding processes. ---------------------- Sec. 392.101. BOND REQUIREMENT. (a) A third-party debt collector or credit bureau may not engage in debt collection unless the third-party debt collector or credit bureau has obtained a surety bond issued by a surety company authorized to do business in this state as prescribed by this section. A copy of the bond must be filed with the secretary of state. Sec. 392.202. (b) Not later than the 30th day after the date a notice of inaccuracy is received, a third-party debt collector who initiates an investigation shall send a written statement to the individual: (1) denying the inaccuracy; (2) admitting the inaccuracy; or (3) stating that the third-party debt collector has not had sufficient time to complete an investigation of the inaccuracy. (c) If the third-party debt collector admits that the item is inaccurate under Subsection (b), the third-party debt collector shall: (1) not later than the fifth business day after the date of the admission, correct the item in the relevant file; and (2) immediately cease collection efforts related to the portion of the debt that was found to be inaccurate and on correction of the item

---

I have checked with the Secretary of State and 3 of the CAs do not have a bond here in Texas. Whas my play then? Demand they delete due to lack of surety bond with the state of Texas?

---

Just to be sure, did you try the parent company name?