FDCPA 809(b) does not explicity define what is or is not adequate validation of a debt. It only requires the debt collector to obtain verification.
When a statue is subject to interpretation, it is left to the courts to determine its specific meaning.
Court interpretation is only binding upon other courts if the court opinion is that of an appellate court, and then it is only binding case law for other courts within that appellate jurisdiction.
As a result, there are numerous interpretations of what is or is not adequate validation of a debt.
You will find some case law that interprets a requrement for supporing documentation, but that interpretation is not generally applicable unless and until the opinion is that of the U.S. Supreme Court. To date, the Supreme Court has not taken up the interpretation of debt validation under the FDCPA.
The overwheliming body of appellate case law is as stated by Norman...... validation requires no supporting documentation.
However, there are a few scattered appellante jurisdicitons that have estalbihed precedent that does require some degree of documentation.
There is thus no consistent legal criteria, and what is or is not adequate validation boils down to what the judge determines based on the case law in the jurisdiction of the court, and the facts of your individual case.
You can always, should you feel the debt collector has not provided adequate validation, bring legal action if and when they resume active collection on the debt, and make your case with the judge. However, it is prudent to first research the appellate case law in your state and federal jurisdiciton.
