topic Re: MOV Letter in General Credit Topics

What do y'all think...TU letter regarding MOV

Anonymous — Tue, 02 Oct 2007 05:58:01 GMT

Ok so last week sometime I faxed disputes to Dave Wolf at TU ~ requesting deletion or MOV on the Midland Account along with requests to reinvestigate a couple of accounts that are still being reported incorrectly. I got this letter in the mail today:

"RE: Verification Documents not Available

We store information in our records as it is supplied to us by creditors. When information is disputed, we are required to investigate and record the current status of the information. We do not provide dispute verification responses received from creditors. If you need to obtain documentation or written verification concerning your accounts, then please contact your creditors directly."

Well big freakin duh...I tried contacting them directly and they are ignoring my validation request..that's why I want to know how you verified the debt with them!! Legally I am entitled to their MOV, correct?

Is this willful noncompliance??

Message Edited by kims on 10-02-2007 12:58 AM

Re: What do y'all think...TU letter regarding MOV

wrw0010 — Tue, 02 Oct 2007 16:00:58 GMT

I'm no expert but if you used the term Method of Verification in your correspondence with them I would say that certainly amounts to willful non-compliance.

Re: What do y'all think...TU letter regarding MOV

Anonymous — Tue, 02 Oct 2007 17:36:56 GMT

Yep I did use that term.

I am requesting that the account be deleted by your agency from my credit report. If that is not possible at this time I request your method of verification regarding this account. The MOV can be mailed to me at the address listed at the top of this letter.

Re: What do y'all think...TU letter regarding MOV

Anonymous — Tue, 02 Oct 2007 21:01:03 GMT

Right idea - wrong approach.

If an OC:

(1) dispute on each bureau (deletion or MOV is not a dispute)

(2) MOV the bureau and at the same time request an 'investigation' from the OC (See OC letter below)

(if the MOV does not have that they contacted the OC -then you have the credit bureau by the shorthairs, and if the OC sends you paperwork that would report differently - then you have the OC too,

(3) Give OC one chance (no more than 14 days) to delete all records or you will sue.

(4) File a complaint with your state AG and/or file a small claims action

IF a CA

(1) dV them

(2) Dispute with bureau

the rest is in the stickies.

OC LETTER

Company

Address

Address

Date

Re: Acct #xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

To Whom It May Concern:

I recently pulled my credit report from Experian, Equifax and TransUnion and noticed this account was listed on each of my reports as a collection I immediately disputed this information with Experian, Equifax and TransUnion and the results of the investigation came back as "verified

Since I have disputed the account with the credit bureaus, and you have verified them, I would like to see what sort of records you have for this alleged account. Under the new FACTA laws, you are required to conduct an investigation on this account, and I am now requesting it.

In order to clear up this matter, I would like to see:

Complete account history, including, all statements, records of all activity, payments, collection attempts, and any charges added for collection activity; In short, any and all documentation pertaining to this account

If you don't respond with the results of the investigation (as is required per the FCRA), I will assume you have no documentation and therefore you were negligent in providing the credit bureaus with accurate information. At this point, you would also be in violation of the FCRA merely for not responding within the 30-day period.

Please send all correspondence to:

Name

Address

Sincerely,

DO NOT SIGN......JUST TYPE NAME

Re: What do y'all think...TU letter regarding MOV

Anonymous — Tue, 02 Oct 2007 22:30:01 GMT

Also, send a letter to TU (include copies of the DV letter and the CMRRR ) stating that they failed to validate.

Second, send another letter to the CA stating that since they failed to validate but have since verified and reported that you intend to sue and file complaints with the AG of you state and the state they are in.

I am not out to win friends with the CAs as you can tell.

Message Edited by Lady_Scarlet on 10-02-2007 05:05 PM

Message Edited by Lady_Scarlet on 10-02-2007 06:30 PM

Re: What do y'all think...TU letter regarding MOV

Anonymous — Tue, 02 Oct 2007 22:00:12 GMT

This is the process I used:

DV'd Midland

Disputed with CRAs

received green card back ~ dv signed for on 09/07/07

pulled CR and Midland verified with CRA's on 09/13,9/14 and 9/18

Sent letter along with copy of DV and green card to TU,EX and EQ asking for deletion or MOV.

Above was the response I received from TU regarding the MOV. I'm pretty sure I did everything properly.

I have also emailed all the brass at Midland/Encore Receivables, after they ignored the validation request and verified with the CRAs, basically telling them to delete the account or the TX AG's office and the BBB would be contacted.

Re: What do y'all think...TU letter regarding MOV

Anonymous — Tue, 02 Oct 2007 22:28:53 GMT

You request deletion from Midland (see below) and MV from the CRA....

Since it verified the CRA can't just delete - but they do have to provide MOV so use that letter (the one in the stickies - you do not have to send them the DV stuff just a request for MOV). If they refuse they can be sued.

The reason for MOVing the CRA is to set them up for a civil suit for an improper verification. Maybe they know they didn''t go about it correctly and are trying to side step. ONE THING to an entity at a time.... BTW - it is legal for a CA to report to a CRA during the 30 day validation timeframe. It is NOT legal to report if they haven't validated after the 30 - so a letter to Midland is in order (edit letter below as needed):

Company
Address 1
Address 2
City, State Zip

Date

RE: Account XXXXX-XXXX-XXXXX

Dear Sir/Madam:

I'm sure you know, under FDCPA Section 809 (b), you are not allowed to pursue collection activity until the debt is validated. You should be made aware that in TWYLA BOATLEY, Plaintiff, vs. DIEM CORPORATION, No. CIV 03-0762 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA, 2004, the courts ruled that reporting a collection account indeed is considered collection activity.

As of ( DATE that you received their letter) You have refused to validate this debt.Therfore you are in violation of FDCPA.

While I prefer not to litigate, I will use the courts as needed to enforce my rights under the FDCPA.

I look forward to an uneventful resolution of this matter, as this debt was PAID in FULL (year)

I request that all contact with me be in writing, and only when you can provide adequate validation of this alleged debt. To refresh your memory on what constitutes legal validation, I am giving a list of the required documentation:

Complete payment history, the requirement of which has been established via Spears v Brennan 745 N.E.2d 862; 2001 Ind. App. LEXIS 509 and
Agreement that bears the signature of the alleged debtor wherein he agreed to pay the original creditor.
Letter of sale or assignment from the original creditor to your company. (Agreement with your client that grants you the authority to collect on this alleged debt.) Coppola v. Arrow Financial Services, 302CV577, 2002 WL 32173704(D.Conn., Oct. 29, 2002) - Information relating to the purchase of a bad debt is not proprietary or burdensome. Debtor must phrase their request clearly to obtain: The source of a debt and the amount a bad debt buyer paid for plaintiff's debt, how amount sought was calculated, where in issue a list of reports to credit bureaus, and documents conferring authority on defendant to collect debt.
Intimate knowledge of the creation of the debt by you, the collection agency.

As you are already in violation, I expect all reference to this account be deleted from my credit report, as this entry and any update of such entry will be considered another violation.

Message Edited by Lady_Scarlet on 10-02-2007 06:25 PM

Message Edited by Lady_Scarlet on 10-02-2007 06:25 PM

Message Edited by Lady_Scarlet on 10-02-2007 06:27 PM

Message Edited by Lady_Scarlet on 10-02-2007 06:28 PM

Re: What do y'all think...TU letter regarding MOV

Anonymous — Tue, 02 Oct 2007 23:00:12 GMT

Lady Scarlet ~ Thanks for the input!

I have requested deletion from Midland ~ see this thread:

http://ficoforums.myfico.com/fico/board/message?board.id=generalcredit&thread.id=46261

and at the same time sent the MOV request to TU, EX and EQ by fax with copies of the DV letter and green card.

I think you might be mistaken regarding validation. During validation they can not report to the CRA's because it constitutes a collection attempt ~ therefore a FDCPA violation. Also, there is no legal timeframe for validation a CA can take as long as they want to validate ~ if ever, but until they send some sort of validation they can not verify with CA's. That's why it's called a double whammy when you DV and dispute. If they haven't or can't validate and the CRA attempts verification they must delete the account from the CRAs until validation can be made. I'm in TX and luckily it's more consumer friendly than most and we can DV at ANY time. I know IC Systems deleted their collection account after I DV'd and disputed them with the CRAs. Received validation yesterday and today the collection is back on EX (GRRRRR) ~ but that's a whole 'nother headache.

I'm going to wait week and see what my email does then I will send another CMRRR debt validation to Midland ~ thanks for the example . I will also send the CRA's another MOV regarding the account.

Re: MOV Letter

Anonymous — Tue, 02 Oct 2007 23:02:10 GMT

CRA
ADDRESS
ADDRESS

Date

Dear Sir or Madam:

On __________ I filed a dispute with Experian regarding the account from _________ which appears on my Experian credit report. On ________ I received the results of the investigation stating that the account had been verified.

Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, section 611(a)(7), I am entitled to receive a description of the procedure used to determine the accuracy and completeness of the information, including the business name and address of any furnisher of information and the telephone number of such furnisher, if reasonably available.

Please mail this information to me at the address below:

Name

Address

Sincerely,

(TYPED NAME)

Re: MOV Letter

Anonymous — Tue, 02 Oct 2007 23:13:07 GMT

Thank you!!

Re: What do y'all think...TU letter regarding MOV

Anonymous — Tue, 02 Oct 2007 23:15:16 GMT

I think (I'm reading soooo much, I may be confused) that FTC in-house lawyers say they can report during the 30 days but can't report after the 30 if they fail to validate - they can get it 'on' the CRAs and it will then be verified every time you dispute (CRAs use a service to verify - they don't call the CA or OC in most instances) and they don't have to report once after that - it's already on your credit. unless you send the second letter for removal - if they don't remove it it is a $1000 fine plus punitive damages; if they then report w/o validation it's another $1K for each offense. However with each dispute you MOV and if they haven't contacted the CA or OC then the CRA is also liable for the $1K fine (separate from the one on the CA)

File complaints with the TX AG and also the FTC

Re: What do y'all think...TU letter regarding MOV

Anonymous — Tue, 02 Oct 2007 23:19:45 GMT

I'm getting everything together now to file a complaint with the AG's office and FTC.

Last I read up there was no set time frame for validation ~ they can take as long as they want. Maybe one of the gurus on here can say more for sure. From what I have read and from what I have been told once they receive a validation request they can not verify with the CRAs because it is considered a collection attempt therefore when the CRA contacts them, by whatever means, they must delete the account until it can be validated...

Noah, Tuscani, Brammy...anyone out there that can say for sure?

Re: What do y'all think...TU letter regarding MOV

Anonymous — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 01:17:46 GMT

I think the 1-2 punch as it is referred too ONLY holds true/any weight in the ORIGINAL 30 days after notification.

CA's should (not required) wait the first 30 days before reporting.

Re: What do y'all think...TU letter regarding MOV

Anonymous — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 01:28:53 GMT

A DV goes to a CA send a MOV to CRAs

http://ficoforums.myfico.com/fico/board/message?board.id=generalcredit&message.id=6237

Re: What do y'all think...TU letter regarding MOV

Anonymous — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 01:31:35 GMT

kims wrote:
I'm getting everything together now to file a complaint with the AG's office and FTC.

Last I read up there was no set time frame for validation ~ they can take as long as they want. Maybe one of the gurus on here can say more for sure. From what I have read and from what I have been told once they receive a validation request they can not verify with the CRAs because it is considered a collection attempt therefore when the CRA contacts them, by whatever means, they must delete the account until it can be validated...

Noah, Tuscani, Brammy...anyone out there that can say for sure?

A CA must validate within 30 days......if they do not...they are in violation if they report or continue any type of collections