How to handle a CA that continues to increase amount owed?

[JShidell]

Was wondering what would be the best approach in tackling this issue.  I've been having problems with everyones beloved Midland.

I received a dunning letter back in Aug from Midland stating that they are now the "proud" new owners of an old Citibank account of mine that I don't recall having and they offered me a settlement amount, but also listed the original "said" amount owed in the letter.  I don't remember having a Citibank account, unless that bank funded one of my old store credit cards.  I sent a standard dv letter immediately asking for verification of the account.  They responded within 30 days with their standard letter, "Midland purchased all rights, titles" blah blah.  However, on their new letter they changed the amount "said" owed (i'm guessing adding interest).

I then immediately fired off a Full Media Validation letter off to them on Sept 10.  I have not heard a word back from them, however they continue to update my credit reports by changing the amount owed (the amount owed has changed three times in little over a month), however they mentiond the account is in dispute.

I also think they might be trying to pursue legal action on me.  My family is telling me they are receiving phone calls from lawyers asking about me.

I'm not sure what to do.  If I send another DV letter i'm almost positive they will probably respond with another standard letter with yet a different amount "said" owed and it will basically be tug of war.

I'm thinking of possibly filing a complaint with BBB, AG and FTC but if they are indeed trying to pursue legal action that will definitely add more fuel to the fire.  I have no problem paying if it was verified, but can't really report to court if I'm summoned being i'm abroad.

According to their letter they are stating the account was charged off in 12-7-04 so i'm guessing that the first default of the account was atleast 60 to 90 days prior to being charged off depending on the OC so i'm pretty sure the account is past SOL (4 Years in Texas).

I'm in a pickle.

v/r

JShidell

[Anonymous]

Does any of the amounts correspond to any CO that you had?

Maybe you should start by researching any store cards you had CO to see who the issuing bank was, this might help you out.

[JShidell]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Does any of the amounts correspond to any CO that you had?

Maybe you should start by researching any store cards you had CO to see who the issuing bank was, this might help you out.

---

There is no OC or CO account on my reports that I can bounce the CA with so I can't even determine the correct DOFD.   When I DV'd Midland all they mentioned was they were trying to collect on a Citibank account of mine, but I never had Citibank.  I do have some old store credit cards where the OCs never reported to the CRAs, but I don't have those old credit cards with me.

v/r

JShidell

[RobertEG]

It is not illegal,and often occurs, that the amount of indebetness can increase from the original debt, due to further accrual of interest and charges that the CA feels entitled to collect in connection with the debt.  But it not legal from them to conceal such fees.

That is why your DV letter should always include, as part of their required validation of the debt, a request for detailed listing of any and all charges currently, and expected to be, included in the debt for which they request payment.  The FTC has supported this as a legitimate, and necessary, element of CA validation of the amount of the debt.  To conceal them is improper.

Put this paragraph in your renewed DV letter:

I request verification of the complete amount of the currently asserted indebtedness. I again request that this verification come directly from the creditor, and not merely from an itemization from your files.  I do not consider records from your files as being sufficient for this purpose.  Statements from the original creditor are essential  Further, if you  have added any additional charges to the amount of the alleged original debt, such as your fees, additional interest or penalties, or any legal fees, I request specific itemization of all such asserted debts and fees as your full disclosure of my asserted current liability.

See FTC Opinion Letter, 3/10/93, available at www.ftc.gov/statutes/fdcpa/letters/wollman.htm,
and federal court precedent, e.g., Fields v. Wilber (7th Cir 2004).

A renewed DV letter is NOT futile!  It will help you build a better case by simply demanding their compliance with the FDCPA, and let them dig a deeper hole if they continue to send you BS responses that are non-compliant.  You know the law and procedure.  Use it!

Message Edited by RobertEG on 10-27-2008 10:57 PM

Message Edited by RobertEG on 10-27-2008 11:04 PM