So I received a "validation" letter today from a CA I dv'd (*after the 30 day period*) that states:
"CA purchased all right, title and interest in the above-referenced account from OC on XXXX.
Our records indicate that MY NAME with SSN is responsible. Account was charged off on XXXX. Account opened on XXXX. Current balance of XXXX."
I take this as not a proper validation (don't know if that's a shared legal opinion since it is was over 30 days); however, disregarding the response for a moment, the CA is still listing the account as "open" (with an incorrect DOLA (and wouldn't the fact that a CO is mentioned in the letter prove this as false?)) and 120+ days late with one CRA.
With another CRA, the account is listed as an "unknown" installment account that has listed interspersed payments on my behalf (which I've never made, not one!), in addition to re-aging the debt and listing 16 90+ day lates.
Furthermore, I received notice that the account was being placed into dispute with the CRAs three days before the validation was sent, which seems a bit fast (though I'm not sure if this is not in fact a legitimate validation time, but I haven't received any notice of such dispute from my myfico score alert, yet at least).
Anyways, looking forward I see my options as:
a) resending a DV asking for proper validation, and this time mentioning TFC (I'm a Texas resident). However, I'm not too optimistic about this method because TFC, from what I have gathered, only demands a validation be given, and I wouldn't be surprised if this CA would just re-send the same letter over and over.
b) disputing with the CRAs using the violations listed above. But here I have a few questions as well. Will the CRA only dispute derogatory items that I mention? Or, would one or two violations be enough to initiate a complete investigation by the CRAs?
or c) threatening legal action based on these violations, but I'm not sure how to go about this though...ITS?
Hope that makes sense...thanks in advance
