One last CA standing in my way!

[faiths13]

thanks : )

So how can I look up if I can ask for them to show more in my state?

[llecs]

---

@faiths13 wrote:

thanks : )

So how can I look up if I can ask for them to show more in my state?

---

You'll pull up your state's statutes and laws to see if more is allowed. There was a point in time we were going to add a thread showing this info but states change their laws all the time and it would have been outdated lately. If it matter any, I'm in VA and no other info is allowed (because DVs aren't even mentioned in the law). In Mass., extra is required if a Mass. resident asks for it. That extra info includes asking for a full accounting. IIRC, Cali and FL don't have anything. Texas doesn't require anything extra, but they are the only state that requires CAs to respond within a time limit (30 days). There are maybe 2-3 other states that require more, but I cannot remember. It's tedious, but work a check of your state's statutes.

[faiths13]

So I am a little confused why a DV letter really works, when you don't ask them to provide much info, and they don't have a certain amount of time to respond to you.

[faiths13]

OK - so I sent the DV, and filed a complaint with the FTC. While I was looking for their info I found a link to the BBB which says the biz has alot of complaints, but is also closed. I found their website which sends me to a new website for a different company. My husband said that was the name of the company that answered the phone. Both businesses have the same addy and phone number. So they reported under a name of a closed biz - can that help me at all? I also filed a complaint with BBB.

[proudnavymom]

---

@llecs wrote:

The FDCPA spells out what can be asked for:

(1) the amount of the debt;

(2) the name of the creditor to whom the debt is owed;

(3) verification of the debt or a copy of a judgment;

(4) the name and address of the original creditor.

Some states have laws on the books that allow for more info. YMMV on that info (e.g. a full accounting, etc.)

---

In the DV's that I have sent, I have kept it short and sweet, such as:

I pulled me credit report and see that you claim that I owe you a debt.  Per the FDCPA, send me validation of the debt.  I am also requesting the name, address, and phone number of the original creditor.  

For the CA's that have just sent me a dunning notice in the mail, after I sent a DV, I never heard from them again or they sent me something saying they were no longer going to pursue collection activities if they had reported on my CR and deleted.  I am in Texas, so the CA's only have 30 days to respond to my DV letters.

[llecs]

+1. That's what mine say. I know what is required in a response and I'd rather hope they slip up vs. telling them what they need to provide.

[RobertEG]

The DV process, as stated in the legislative history of the FDCPA, is primarily to require the debt collector to "obtain" an explicit statement from the creditor that the debt is considered by them to be valid.  It carries with it the presumption of honesty in the verification process.... that the debt collector has obtained verification from the creditor, and that the creditor has honestly stated the debt to be valid.  It requires the debt collector to obtain some assurance that the debt relates to that consumer, and is of the amount asserted.  It is not set forth in either the statue or its legislative history as a legal discovery process.

I know of no states that have, within their actual civil code, requirements pertaining to the need for documenation as part of the federal DV process.

There is case law in some jurisdictions that make interpretations of the statute requiring evidence as a part of the verification process, but their is no uniform standard to that effect.  The major federal court decisions hold that a statement from the creditor as to the validity of the debt meets the terms of the statute..  To assert that documentation is necessary will require a ruling as such by a judge in your jurisdiction that applies to your specific case.