Received letter of intent to sue for a CC CO

[money_talks]

I have an CC CO that is still within my state's SOL. Only the OC is reporting on my CR but it is listed as sold. I contacted the OC and the debt has been sold 3 times over the years so that means the company that sent me this intent to sue letter is the 4th owner of the debt and probably paid very little for this account. Would this be a fair assumption? If yes, I should be able to get a settlement with them? I can pay 50% max of the balance. How about 30% of the balance? Would that be reasonable? Again, if they paid pennies for this account, it would still be a huge profit for the company.

Here is what the letter from the CA states:

"Notice of intent to file litigation and incur court cost and legal fees. Pursuant to the Code of Civil Procedure Section 1033(b)(2), this letter advises you that if this matter remains unresolved, our intent is to pursue litigation against you in Superior Court. Please note that litigation could result in a judgment against you which may include our clients court cost and necessary disbursements, all of which you could be responsible for".

So that's the letter. It does not give a time frame to respond. Like I said, I am willing to settle the account for less than the balance as I definitely don't want any further reporting to my CR in addition to the OC reporting.

Questions:

1) I haven't contacted this CA yet since I would not be able to settle until next month. In the meantime, I should refrain from contacting them until I am ready to settle, correct? Or should I send a DV letter? The debt is legit, however, it would be nice to receive something from the CA showing they are legally entitled to collect the debt. It could also buy me time until next month. I should point out the this CA bought the account in July 2012. This is the first letter I receive from this CA. But I am unsure if they have contacted me before and they just have not been able to reach me.

2) If I am able to settle before being sued, will the CA report to the CRAs once the account is settled? Or do I need to get it in writing before making a payment that once payment is received, they will not report to the CRAs. As stated, only the OC is reporting on my CR.

3) If sending a DV is a good idea, is this a good wording?

I request validation of the debt under FDCPA 809(a). I request that you provide the following:

-Itemized listing of the current debt

-Name, address, and phone number of OC

-Proof that the CA is legally entitled to collect on this account

[guiness56]

Normally I wouldn't send a DV unless you could PIF because they could turn around and sue you.

When will this be outside SOL for suing?

You can send a DV letter and it will put in place a cease collection bar.  Until they receive the DV they could still file a suit.  Once received they cannot until they validate.

If you do send a DV, leave off the last sentence as they are not required to provide that.

Once they validate then I would offer the settlement.  Yes, they can report once it is settled but that could be part of the negotiations.

[money_talks]

Thanks guiness56.

The DOFD for the debt is October 2010. My state's SOL is 4 years.

[RobertEG]

My input.......

You state that you are unsure as to whether they sent prior dunning notice.  That could be an issue if you send a DV, as it would only be timely, and thus invoke a cease collection bar, if sent within the 30-day period from dunning notice.

You can assume that your DV is timely, and just send it.  It would then be up the them to decide whether it is timely, and thus puts in place a cease collection bar.

They no obligation to respond to the DV unless and until they decide to coninue active collection, and violation would only occur should they do so, and the DV were timely

The clear advantage of a DV would be to block credit reporting until such time as they verify, but that is fleeting.....

The issue of whether or not they can file legal action without first providing debt verification has been handled in different manner by different courts, and I would not simply presume that it will bar legal action.  The court could agree and choose to dismiss if you motion that their action violates their cease collection bar, however there is case law wherein the court has avoided that sticky issue by simply staying the proceeding, and requiring the debt collector to first provide the requeseted verification before moving forward.

Asserting their action is a violation is thus apt, in my opinion, to lead to a whole lot of legal wrangling, of which you cannot be certain of the outcome.

It is essentially pro forma, as if they are willing to bring the issue before a court, it is almost certain that they have sufficient basis to simply state that they verify the debt.

If you chosse to send the DV, I would probably not make a case before the court, should they bring legal action, that the action is a violation of their cease collection bar.

Sending what you consider as a timely DV will additionally preclude you from negotiating any settlement with them until they choose to respond, as its cease collection bar will prevent collection activities on their part.  Thus, you place yourself in a state of self-imposed limbo, to which they can simply verify and sue without any further communication with you.

In my opinion, sending a DV now, in view of the fact that you admit legitimacy of the debt, would not be my next step.

It could easily infer that you are resisiting satsfaction of the debt, and simply promote their steps of a quick verification, credit reporting, and  bringing legal action.

I would suspect they would shoot out a quick verification, which requires no proofs, and file with the court.

Personally, I would take the negotiate without a DV route.  You can adddress a pay for not reporting offer, and/or a settlement for less offer, and feel them out.

The rub is that if you begin negotiations, good-faith on your part would require that you have the immediate ability to pay should you reach agreement.

[money_talks]

Thanks RobertEG.

I will wait until next month when I do have the ability to pay to begin negotiations and hopefully get a settlement with them agreeing not to report to the CRAs. I won't send a DV for the reasons you mentioned.