topic Re: DV Time Limitations in General Credit Topics

DV Time Limitations

blaksun333 — Thu, 06 May 2010 22:11:53 GMT

Hello,

If you CMRR DV a CA after the inital 30 day limit listed on the first CA letter, do they stop reporting and delete the account until it is verified? Or is this only valid if you dispute the debt within the 30 days of receiving the first CA letter?

If they fail to respond within 30 days of receiving my CMRR Letter (counting mailing days), can I forward copies and statement to the CRAs for deletion?

Re: DV Time Limitations

MarineVietVet — Thu, 06 May 2010 23:07:02 GMT

@blaksun333 wrote:
Hello,

If you CMRR DV a CA after the inital 30 day limit listed on the first CA letter, do they stop reporting and delete the account until it is verified? Or is this only valid if you dispute the debt within the 30 days of receiving the first CA letter? I'm not sure if you can still DV after the initial 30 days except in Texas where there is no time limit to DV and the CA must respond within 30 days or delete.

If they fail to respond within 30 days of receiving my CMRR Letter (counting mailing days), can I forward copies and statement to the CRAs for deletion? The CA never has to respond to a DV letter (except in Texas) but until they do respond or delete all collection efforts must cease.

From a BK years ago to:

9/09 EX pulled by lender 802
3/10 EQ- 800
4/10 TU -772

You can do the same thing with hard work

Credit Scoring 101
Common Abbreviations
Frequently Requested Threads
Credit Problems Which Is Worse?
Whats In Your FICO Score

Re: DV Time Limitations

blaksun333 — Fri, 07 May 2010 02:05:36 GMT

Thank you for your response. This is good since I am in Texas.

One more question...

If I disputed this account with the CRAs prior to the DVs and was verified, if the CA does not respond after the 30 day limit, will this still be deleted?

Re: DV Time Limitations

Anonymous — Fri, 07 May 2010 02:32:38 GMT

DV request can occur at any time. The initial 30 day notice is generally the 30 days that pass before the CA starts reporting COLLACT (collection activity) to the credit bureaus. If it takes longer than 30 days for the CA to collect the paperwork on your acct and you forward that to the credit bureaus, the credit bureaus will initiate their own investigation and send a dispute letter to the CA. At that point, the CA is inclined to respond in a timely manner. If they do not respond and you succeed in getting it off your credit, it still does not totally release you from liability to pay the debt. If they later find that the debt is truly yours, they can still take various actions in order to collect it.

If you know the debt is yours, I'd strongly advise against taking frivolous DV actions. It can shut the door on a collector being willing to work out payment or settlement arrangements with you, and in some cases, a collector may become more inclined to refer it to an attorney in order to seek judgement if it is a sizeable debt (generally $1.5k +)

Re: DV Time Limitations

MarineVietVet — Fri, 07 May 2010 03:17:33 GMT

@blaksun333 wrote:
Thank you for your response. This is good since I am in Texas.

One more question...

If I disputed this account with the CRAs prior to the DVs and was verified, if the CA does not respond after the 30 day limit, will this still be deleted?

Disputing with the CRA's and DV'ing a CA are two different actions. Once you DV that CA they have 30 days to respond since you live in the great state of Texas. Here is the Texas Finance Code if you'd like to read it.

From a BK years ago to:

9/09 EX pulled by lender 802
3/10 EQ- 800
4/10 TU -772

You can do the same thing with hard work

Credit Scoring 101
Common Abbreviations
Frequently Requested Threads
Credit Problems Which Is Worse?
Whats In Your FICO Score

Re: DV Time Limitations

blaksun333 — Fri, 07 May 2010 03:18:55 GMT

Thank you again for your replies.

Re: DV Time Limitations

MarineVietVet — Fri, 07 May 2010 03:26:10 GMT

@Anonymous wrote:
DV request can occur at any time. The initial 30 day notice is generally the 30 days that pass before the CA starts reporting COLLACT (collection activity) to the credit bureaus. If it takes longer than 30 days for the CA to collect the paperwork on your acct and you forward that to the credit bureaus, the credit bureaus will initiate their own investigation and send a dispute letter to the CA. At that point, the CA is inclined to respond in a timely manner. If they do not respond and you succeed in getting it off your credit, it still does not totally release you from liability to pay the debt. If they later find that the debt is truly yours, they can still take various actions in order to collect it.

If you know the debt is yours, I'd strongly advise against taking frivolous DV actions. It can shut the door on a collector being willing to work out payment or settlement arrangements with you, and in some cases, a collector may become more inclined to refer it to an attorney in order to seek judgement if it is a sizeable debt (generally $1.5k +)

I'm not sure what you mean by frivolous. Even if you know a debt is yours there is absolutely nothing wrong with asking a CA to prove that they have the right to attempt to collect a debt because if they don't have the legal right that is all you need to be done with them. I think it's always a very wise move.

IMO

Re: DV Time Limitations

Anonymous — Fri, 07 May 2010 04:34:26 GMT

I'm speaking from being on the other side of the fence. It is completely reasonable and justifiable for someone to request DV, but it can be a very time consuming process for the collectors. I work as a collector myself, for a highly respectable CA (there are many awful/unlawful CAs out there that have given the business a bad name) that primarily serves credit unions (on consignment/assignment, not a debt buyer). Some of our clients send us electronic assignments with minimal paperwork, and it can take a bit of time and follow up to complete a DV request, due to the sheer volume of deliquent accounts in this economy, on top of the efficiency of various internal filing protocols the credit union may/may not have.

In the vast majority of the cases where I have provided DV to the person requesting, they stop communicating once I send it to them, as they never had any intention to take responsibility or make arrangements regarding their financial obligations. I'm left with the sentiment that many of the people who request DV are just pinging the CA to see if they can get out of the debt/negative mark on their credit. As a result of this, I always always request "suit authorization" from the clients whenever someone requests a DV on a larger balance, as the documents necessary to refer a file to our attorney for a lawful suit are quintessentially the DV docs.

The clients I serve are a bit of a special case as credit unions are non profit organizations that typically exist to provide reasonable lending options to their members. If every defaulted account requested DV, the credit unions and their agents (the CAs) would not be able to effectively recover lost assets in a timely fashion, which could result in many CU's shutting their doors. In my personal opinion, credit unions are pro-consumer lending institutions compared with big for-profit banks that have the overhead to write off huge losses. It'd be a shame if credit unions had to shutter their doors or change their policies/rates towards potential borrowers due the overhead costs of deliquent accounts fighting their lawful debts tooth and nail.

Now I'm not trying to point fingers, just trying to enlighten the original poster with what is potentially is going on in the heads of the people on the other side once you request DV, as I don't think the behaviour I've experienced is necessarily unique to my demographic (State of Kommiefornia). When it comes to debt buyers/resellers, yes, I would always recommend requesting DV. I have a few opinions about those kinds of businesses, but that's not within the scope of op's question.

While I am a collector, I do breathe through my nose, not my mouth, I'm educated, and I did not eat any babies this morning; I'm a human too.

Re: DV Time Limitations

Anonymous — Fri, 07 May 2010 06:26:58 GMT

@Anonymous wrote:
I'm speaking from being on the other side of the fence. It is completely reasonable and justifiable for someone to request DV, but it can be a very time consuming process for the collectors. I work as a collector myself, for a highly respectable CA (there are many awful/unlawful CAs out there that have given the business a bad name) that primarily serves credit unions (on consignment/assignment, not a debt buyer). Some of our clients send us electronic assignments with minimal paperwork, and it can take a bit of time and follow up to complete a DV request, due to the sheer volume of deliquent accounts in this economy, on top of the efficiency of various internal filing protocols the credit union may/may not have.

In the vast majority of the cases where I have provided DV to the person requesting, they stop communicating once I send it to them, as they never had any intention to take responsibility or make arrangements regarding their financial obligations. I'm left with the sentiment that many of the people who request DV are just pinging the CA to see if they can get out of the debt/negative mark on their credit. As a result of this, I always always request "suit authorization" from the clients whenever someone requests a DV on a larger balance, as the documents necessary to refer a file to our attorney for a lawful suit are quintessentially the DV docs.

The clients I serve are a bit of a special case as credit unions are non profit organizations that typically exist to provide reasonable lending options to their members. If every defaulted account requested DV, the credit unions and their agents (the CAs) would not be able to effectively recover lost assets in a timely fashion, which could result in many CU's shutting their doors. In my personal opinion, credit unions are pro-consumer lending institutions compared with big for-profit banks that have the overhead to write off huge losses. It'd be a shame if credit unions had to shutter their doors or change their policies/rates towards potential borrowers due the overhead costs of deliquent accounts fighting their lawful debts tooth and nail.

Now I'm not trying to point fingers, just trying to enlighten the original poster with what is potentially is going on in the heads of the people on the other side once you request DV, as I don't think the behaviour I've experienced is necessarily unique to my demographic (State of Kommiefornia). When it comes to debt buyers/resellers, yes, I would always recommend requesting DV. I have a few opinions about those kinds of businesses, but that's not within the scope of op's question.

While I am a collector, I do breathe through my nose, not my mouth, I'm educated, and I did not eat any babies this morning; I'm a human too.

A couple of observations ...

1. You cannot sue until you have DV'd per the consumer's timely request; and

2. Documentation required for a proper DV is not at all the same as what you'd need to win a properly defended lawsuit.

Re: DV Time Limitations

Anonymous — Fri, 07 May 2010 06:27:50 GMT

@blaksun333 wrote:
Hello,

If you CMRR DV a CA after the inital 30 day limit listed on the first CA letter, do they stop reporting and delete the account until it is verified? Or is this only valid if you dispute the debt within the 30 days of receiving the first CA letter?

If they fail to respond within 30 days of receiving my CMRR Letter (counting mailing days), can I forward copies and statement to the CRAs for deletion?

It varies from state to state, but in most federal cases pertaining to DV the consensus is that the DV must be timely made.

Re: DV Time Limitations

Anonymous — Fri, 07 May 2010 07:08:34 GMT

Suit authorization and an actual suit are two separate things, hence the quotations.

Getting an authorization to sue simply means that a CA (working as an assignee for a creditor) has the written authorization of the client to sue someone on their behalf should it become necessary, it doesn't necessarily mean that the CA will sue. This is a behind the scenes process in collections that happens and may be at the forefront of the collector's mind if he/she gets a DV request. If I don't already have it, when I request a suit authorization, the client will provide copies of:

(greatly varies, depending on the type of credit)

App/Signed Contract/Lending Agreement

Disclosure form

Statements

The only other thing unique in a DV is showing that the account was assigned or purchased by/from the OC (if they requested proof of assignment/purchase).

When someone requests a DV from me, I will have it mailed to them, but I'm under no obligation of informing them that I requested suit authorization; at that moment, there is no intention of suing. It is just a mental note in the mind of the collector. It is illegal to threaten to sue someone if there is no intention. What I am trying to inform, is that he/she may inadvertently become one step closer to having a Notice of Intention sent to them, because the CA does indeed have all of the documents needed to seek judgement (and the collector has preformed opinions about the people who request DVs).

Again, just trying to educate and provide insight into some of the processes (mental and otherwise) that occur in collections. Not really here to argue about the finer points of what is needed for a suit, since it is unrelated to op's question...

Re: DV Time Limitations

Anonymous — Fri, 07 May 2010 07:34:27 GMT

@Anonymous wrote:
Suit authorization and an actual suit are two separate things, hence the quotations.

Getting an authorization to sue simply means that a CA (working as an assignee for a creditor) has the written authorization of the client to sue someone on their behalf should it become necessary, it doesn't necessarily mean that the CA will sue. This is a behind the scenes process in collections that happens and may be at the forefront of the collector's mind if he/she gets a DV request. If I don't already have it, when I request a suit authorization, the client will provide copies of:

(greatly varies, depending on the type of credit)
App/Signed Contract/Lending Agreement
Disclosure form
Statements

The only other thing unique in a DV is showing that the account was assigned or purchased by/from the OC (if they requested proof of assignment/purchase).

When someone requests a DV from me, I will have it mailed to them, but I'm under no obligation of informing them that I requested suit authorization; at that moment, there is no intention of suing. It is just a mental note in the mind of the collector. It is illegal to threaten to sue someone if there is no intention. What I am trying to inform, is that he/she may inadvertently become one step closer to having a Notice of Intention sent to them, because the CA does indeed have all of the documents needed to seek judgement (and the collector has preformed opinions about the people who request DVs).

Again, just trying to educate and provide insight into some of the processes (mental and otherwise) that occur in collections. Not really here to argue about the finer points of what is needed for a suit, since it is unrelated to op's question...

I just wanted to clarify that:

1. A CA is not able to sue until after a proper response to a timely made DV request; and

2. None of the documents you listed are required in a proper DV response.

Frankly, it's difficult to see why a reputable CA would be offended by a DV request to the point of actually accelerating a lawsuit. Unless, of course, the CA was not reputable.

Re: DV Time Limitations

Anonymous — Fri, 07 May 2010 08:01:49 GMT

I'm not sure I appreciate what you are implying.

In my experience, take it as you will, the majority of people who have requested DV had no intentions of paying back financial obligations they legally owed. This causes a logical conclusion to be drawn [with a collector] that someone requesting a DV is possibly trying to avoid paying a debt. Just as a lender is inclined to not provide credit to someone with a low FICO, or someone conditioned to not touch a hot stove after being burned too many times, or even someone who has dealt with too many bad CAs is apt to fight with them the moment they call. The effect is that the suit process [may] be accelerated by requesting a DV if you know you have no doubts about the debt/validity of the CA. Monies owed are monies owed; the moment a line of credit is defaulted, that person is immediately at risk of having a judgement filed against them [if it is legitimate], regardless of whether it is 90 days down the line, or 2 years. Someone legally owing monies to a creditor should not harbor resentment should they become held legally accountable for repayment of those debts.

FDCPA, FCRA and various laws exist to protect consumers from fraud and abusive behavior, not as a method of delaying or avoiding paying monies legally owed. This website exists to promote fiscal responsibility; as such, those tools should also be used responsibly. Just sayin.

Re: DV Time Limitations

Anonymous — Fri, 07 May 2010 08:37:45 GMT

@Anonymous wrote:
I'm not sure I appreciate what you are implying.

In my experience, take it as you will, the majority of people who have requested DV had no intentions of paying back financial obligations they legally owed. This causes a logical conclusion to be drawn [with a collector] that someone requesting a DV is possibly trying to avoid paying a debt. Just as a lender is inclined to not provide credit to someone with a low FICO, or someone conditioned to not touch a hot stove after being burned too many times, or even someone who has dealt with too many bad CAs is apt to fight with them the moment they call. The effect is that the suit process [may] be accelerated by requesting a DV if you know you have no doubts about the debt/validity of the CA. Monies owed are monies owed; the moment a line of credit is defaulted, that person is immediately at risk of having a judgement filed against them [if it is legitimate], regardless of whether it is 90 days down the line, or 2 years. Someone legally owing monies to a creditor should not harbor resentment should they become held legally accountable for repayment of those debts.

FDCPA, FCRA and various laws exist to protect consumers from fraud and abusive behavior, not as a method of delaying or avoiding paying monies legally owed. This website exists to promote fiscal responsibility; as such, those tools should also be used responsibly. Just sayin.

I suppose Congress establish the law which requires a CA to provide validation for a reason -- specifically, according to documents which establish congressional intent -- because of the overabundance of abusive, disreputable and irresponsible CAs.

With that said, nobody is saying your CA is disreputable. Read correctly, I only clarified a popular misconcention that a CA cannot sue until properly responding to a timely made DV request. I am also stating -- to again clarify popular misconceptions -- that the documents you implied are necessary for a proper DV are, in fact, not at all required and, unless other conditions are met, do not even meet the requirements of a proper DV.

I do believe that any CA who is quick with the trigger finger only because a debtor avails themselves of consumer protection laws leaves a lot to be desired.

Re: DV Time Limitations

blaksun333 — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 05:07:19 GMT

Hello Marinevietvet,

First of all, just wanted to thank you for your service in Vietnam. My dad was a Navy SEAL in Vietnam and I am proud of all of our armed forces, current and retired.

Getting back to credit talk, please look at the following time line from my credit log:

**** I live in Texas*****

20 APR 10: Mailed DV letter to CA via CMRR

23 APR 10: Received signed CMRR green letter

24 MAY 10: Did not receive any kind of response from CA (as of 08 JUN 10 still zero response!) and proceeded to mail deletion letters to the three CRAs via CMRR; cited Texas Finance Code, Title 5, Chapter 392...

27-30 MAY 10: CRAs accepted letters and received green cards thereafter

04 JUN 10: Received notice from Experian to submit further paperwork to confirm identity

In general, how long do the CRAs take to formally delete my disputed CA account? Should I resubmit my deletion letters to TransUnion and Equifax with information requested by Experian to confirm identity? This includes the following:

Full Name

Current mailing address

social security number

Date of birth.......etc...etc...etc....

Thanks for the help.

Re: DV Time Limitations

MarineVietVet — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 13:05:23 GMT

@blaksun333 wrote:
Hello Marinevietvet,

First of all, just wanted to thank you for your service in Vietnam. My dad was a Navy SEAL in Vietnam and I am proud of all of our armed forces, current and retired.

Getting back to credit talk, please look at the following time line from my credit log:
**** I live in Texas*****
20 APR 10: Mailed DV letter to CA via CMRR
23 APR 10: Received signed CMRR green letter
24 MAY 10: Did not receive any kind of response from CA (as of 08 JUN 10 still zero response!) and proceeded to mail deletion letters to the three CRAs via CMRR; cited Texas Finance Code, Title 5, Chapter 392...
27-30 MAY 10: CRAs accepted letters and received green cards thereafter
04 JUN 10: Received notice from Experian to submit further paperwork to confirm identity

In general, how long do the CRAs take to formally delete my disputed CA account? Should I resubmit my deletion letters to TransUnion and Equifax with information requested by Experian to confirm identity? This includes the following:

Full Name
Current mailing address
social security number
Date of birth.......etc...etc...etc....

Thanks for the help.

Thanks for the kind words and thank your dad on my behalf for his service.

I think I would also file a complaint with the Texas AG because you did not receive a response within the 30 days required by Texas law. I would wait 30-45 days to see if anything happens as far as deletions. I must tell you though that I'm not an expert in this area (or any area ) having never done what you are attempting. All my negatives were dead of old age before I found these forums and learned about DV, GW, PFD, SOL, etc. Others can give much better advice.

From a BK years ago to:
9/09 EX pulled by lender 802
3/10 EQ- 800
4/10 TU -772

You can do the same thing with hard work

Credit Scoring 101
Common Abbreviations
Frequently Requested Threads
Whats In Your FICO Score

Re: DV Time Limitations

blaksun333 — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 15:00:38 GMT

Thanks for the advice. I submitted my complaint with the Texas AG. Will see what happens and will update this post accordingly.

Re: DV Time Limitations

blaksun333 — Sun, 13 Jun 2010 02:38:42 GMT

Hello Everyone,

Just received a response from TransUnion and the account came back as verified???????

I stated on my letter that the CA was in violation of the Texas Finance code....... and they still verified????

What can I do now?

Re: DV Time Limitations

MarineVietVet — Sun, 13 Jun 2010 16:42:51 GMT

@blaksun333 wrote:
Hello Everyone,

Just received a response from TransUnion and the account came back as verified???????
I stated on my letter that the CA was in violation of the Texas Finance code....... and they still verified????

What can I do now?

I would continue to pursue any possible relief through the AG of Texas. I'm not sure what else is needed. As I said I'm no expert in this area.

From a BK years ago to:
9/09 EX pulled by lender 802
3/10 EQ- 800
4/10 TU -772

You can do the same thing with hard work

Credit Scoring 101
Common Abbreviations
Frequently Requested Threads
Whats In Your FICO Score

Re: DV Time Limitations

blaksun333 — Sun, 25 Jul 2010 21:21:44 GMT

I want to thank all of you for your advice and support. I finally was able to remove my last derogatory account from my 3 CRs by contacting ACA International as a last resort. I advise everyone having trouble removing invalid accounts from their credit report by filing a complaint with the ACA. Please note that the CA must be a registered member with the ACA.