darrello wrote:
I originally DV'd Portfolio Recovery in May and they responded with an invoice printed up on their letterhead with original creditor as Midland Credit and an amount owed. I had requested full media validation, so I was advised to send 2nd DV
Second DV sent, and got a response yesterday. " PRA is in receipt of your second validation request or dispute concerning the acoount referenced. In our response to your initial communication, we provided validation of the account as required by federal case law. Specifically, the courts have stated that verification of a debt involves "nothing more than the debt collector confirming in writing that the amount being demanded is what the creditor is claiming is owed".
Is this what is considered validation by federal courts? Couldn't any Joe Blow say anyone owes them money and all they have to do is put it in writing? This is BS!
What should I do now? Thanks for everyone's advice!
First off, Midland Credit is NOT a creditor.
Second, FDCPA does not really define what proper validation is. It does state a "copy of the debt or judgment" or "verification of the name and address of the original creditor" or something along those lines. Proper validation is open for debate and has been ruled on in a few courts.
I would send a letter back stating, I requested validation not verification. I am not requesting the same information that I can look at my credit report and get. I would like PROOF that this is a valid debt that I owe and you are legally able to collect. The first response I received from you was an attempt to validate, but did not fullfill my request and was innaccurate. The statement received listed Midland Credit as the creditor and I have never had a credit transaction with them. If Midland Credit is in fact the creditor on the above referenced account and this the only information you can provide, then I can only assume that this is not my debt, please remove it from my credit reports.
Something along those lines.
