Instead of DV referred to another CA

Jeeper44 · ‎10-19-2016

I was contacted back in December about a judgement from 12 years ago that was never paid. In the past I had a company that wasn't authorized attempt to collect on a debt, so I won't deal with anybody unless i have some validation that they are legally authorized to collect. When this company contacted me last year I immediately started the DV process. I never heard back from them but a few weeks ago I started getting calls from another CA stating they were representing the first one and attempting to collect... I am about to send another DV letter to this second company however I am just curious about the FPDCA violations. They never responded to my request to provide proof that they were legally authorized to collect. Even if this second company can provide proof, are they actually in violation representing another company that is already in violation? Should I include in the DV letter a statement that the company they are representing is acting in violation of the law?

RobertEG · ‎10-19-2016

There is no FDCPA violation.

The DV process (FDCPA 809) does not set any period for or requirement to provide validation.

It imposes, provided the DV was timely, a cease collection bar upon the debt collector, which remains in effect until such time as the debt collector chooses to send validation.

The primary purpose of the federal DV process is to provide consumers a reprieve from active collection activities until they have first been provided validation of the asserted debt. The federal DV process does not compel mandatory validation.

In the case of a debt collector 1, if their collection authority is terminated in favor of a new debt collector 2, then the prior DV sent to debt collector 1 is essentially moot, as the termination of collection authority ceases any further collection by them. Thus, a cease collection bar is separately imposed by the termination of collection authority.

To impose a new cease collection bar, you must send a timely DV to the new debt collector.

As an aside, some states have implemented their own separate, enhanced DV statutes/regs that do impose some requirements to respond.

To invoke any state debt validation requirments, one must send a separate DV request that specifically identifies the state statute/reg.

What is your state of residence?

Jeeper44 · ‎10-24-2016

So there is really no legal way to ensure the company your dealing with legitimately has the authority to collect on it. I've been through this before with P.N. Financial who was trying to collect on an old debt that they did not own, nor were they legally licensed in my State as a debt collector. I had the State give them a cease and desist order but they continued to contact me for a time. I know they were activly being sued by the State of Illinois at the time for illegal debt collection practices. Now I didn't send them any money but I'm sure thousands of people did, hence their business model. They still had no requirement to prove to me they were who they said they were, and not just another scam artist?

Anonymous · ‎10-24-2016

@Jeeper44 wrote:
So there is really no legal way to ensure the company your dealing with legitimately has the authority to collect on it. I've been through this before with P.N. Financial who was trying to collect on an old debt that they did not own, nor were they legally licensed in my State as a debt collector. I had the State give them a cease and desist order but they continued to contact me for a time. I know they were activly being sued by the State of Illinois at the time for illegal debt collection practices. Now I didn't send them any money but I'm sure thousands of people did, hence their business model. They still had no requirement to prove to me they were who they said they were, and not just another scam artist?

As RobertEG indicated, they are not legally required to RESPOND, however your DV, if timely, DOES require them to STOP collection activity until they do provide validation. That includes all bills and calls to you.

Most of the time the bottom feeder CA's will simply sell the account on the secondary junk debt market and move on to easier prey.

RobertEG · ‎10-24-2016

The consumer always has the option/right to initiate civil action as a means to compel the debt collector to provide all relevant evidence, via the discovery process, relating to validity of the debt.

The FCRA dispute and FDCPA debt validation processes are administrative, with goals that do not include full consideration of all evidence. The courts provide such considerations under the rules of evidence.

The FCRA dispute process has as a primary goal a quick and assured (30-day) period that does not provide for full consideration of all evidence, and the DV process has as a stipulated goal of the cessation of active collection by a debt collector until validation is provided.

Jeeper44 · ‎10-25-2016

@Anonymous wrote:
@Jeeper44 wrote:
So there is really no legal way to ensure the company your dealing with legitimately has the authority to collect on it. I've been through this before with P.N. Financial who was trying to collect on an old debt that they did not own, nor were they legally licensed in my State as a debt collector. I had the State give them a cease and desist order but they continued to contact me for a time. I know they were activly being sued by the State of Illinois at the time for illegal debt collection practices. Now I didn't send them any money but I'm sure thousands of people did, hence their business model. They still had no requirement to prove to me they were who they said they were, and not just another scam artist?

As RobertEG indicated, they are not legally required to RESPOND, however your DV, if timely, DOES require them to STOP collection activity until they do provide validation. That includes all bills and calls to you.

Most of the time the bottom feeder CA's will simply sell the account on the secondary junk debt market and move on to easier prey.

Ah, see now you've gotten to the point of my original post. I DV'ed the first CA including the line that I only wish to have contact on this matter via writing, no phone calls. This means that they should not legally be able to call me any more. Now I get a phone call from CA2 and one of the first things they say is "We represent CA1 and are calling youi about ..." Had they not actually said they were calling on behalf of the first agency, I would have thought it was another matter of the debt moving down the food chain and started the process over again. I'm still going to DV the second agency, I was just curious, if a company legally cannot contact you by phone, shouldn't that include any of their representatives.

Anonymous · ‎10-25-2016

@Jeeper44 wrote:
@Anonymous wrote:
@Jeeper44 wrote:
So there is really no legal way to ensure the company your dealing with legitimately has the authority to collect on it. I've been through this before with P.N. Financial who was trying to collect on an old debt that they did not own, nor were they legally licensed in my State as a debt collector. I had the State give them a cease and desist order but they continued to contact me for a time. I know they were activly being sued by the State of Illinois at the time for illegal debt collection practices. Now I didn't send them any money but I'm sure thousands of people did, hence their business model. They still had no requirement to prove to me they were who they said they were, and not just another scam artist?

As RobertEG indicated, they are not legally required to RESPOND, however your DV, if timely, DOES require them to STOP collection activity until they do provide validation. That includes all bills and calls to you.

Most of the time the bottom feeder CA's will simply sell the account on the secondary junk debt market and move on to easier prey.
Ah, see now you've gotten to the point of my original post. I DV'ed the first CA including the line that I only wish to have contact on this matter via writing, no phone calls. This means that they should not legally be able to call me any more. Now I get a phone call from CA2 and one of the first things they say is "We represent CA1 and are calling youi about ..." Had they not actually said they were calling on behalf of the first agency, I would have thought it was another matter of the debt moving down the food chain and started the process over again. I'm still going to DV the second agency, I was just curious, if a company legally cannot contact you by phone, shouldn't that include any of their representatives.

Honestly I am uncertain - this is kind of a gray area, complicated by the often incestuous nature of the collection industry. Many CA's are commonly held by parent companies like Sherman Capital, or go by various names like Midland - personally I would consider such entities to be the same company, and such shenanigans as merely a way of getting around the collection bar without actually validating. Perhaps RobertEG could shed some light on these kind of situations.

What are the names of the two CA's in your case?

RobertEG · ‎10-25-2016

FDCPA 809(b) imposes a bar on "collection on the debt" after receipt of a timely DV.

That is comprehensive, and includes any communication or other action that relates to collection on the debt.

That would, in my opinion, include any collection activities via their assigned rep.

Even if one were to interpret the cease collection bar as not applying to an assignee, their call would then constitute a communication with the consumer regarding the debt, which imposes a requimrent under section 809(a) to have sent their own dunning notice within 5 days after that call.

Thus, if they did not follow up that call with a dunning notice, they would, if they assert to have become a new debt collector in favor of the old one, be in violation of the dunning notice requirement. By not sending dunning notice, they are apparently considering themselves to be calling on behalf of debt collector 1, and not establishing themseleves as a new debt collector.

Either way, you have basis for a formal complaint to the CFPB or initiation of you own civil action for violation of the FDCPA.

You may have an easy $1,000 statutory damages action.....

Anonymous · ‎10-26-2016

@RobertEG wrote:
FDCPA 809(b) imposes a bar on "collection on the debt" after receipt of a timely DV.
That is comprehensive, and includes any communication or other action that relates to collection on the debt.
That would, in my opinion, include any collection activities via their assigned rep.

Even if one were to interpret the cease collection bar as not applying to an assignee, their call would then constitute a communication with the consumer regarding the debt, which imposes a requimrent under section 809(a) to have sent their own dunning notice within 5 days after that call.
Thus, if they did not follow up that call with a dunning notice, they would, if they assert to have become a new debt collector in favor of the old one, be in violation of the dunning notice requirement. By not sending dunning notice, they are apparently considering themselves to be calling on behalf of debt collector 1, and not establishing themseleves as a new debt collector.
Either way, you have basis for a formal complaint to the CFPB or initiation of you own civil action for violation of the FDCPA.
You may have an easy $1,000 statutory damages action.....

^^^^^^ +1