Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Noah? DV vs. dispute

Established Contributor

Noah? DV vs. dispute

I have my summary judgment tomorrow morning (yes I'm having a few at this moment); and want to say thanks first because I know on the forums I've read I was supposed to DV in the first 30 days.  What I want to know is exactly  WHERE is states this?  I've pulled the MN AG web page as well as the FDCPA info and another one from "debtconsolidationcare" website...all state that one is required to "dispute" the debt in it's entirety or any portion thereof within the initial 30 days...this is also the same statement CAs are required to put in any collection notice.
This is what it came down to, I did "dispute" the debt, I did use the cease & desist, but this was two years ago almost; and you say not to...however the law says if I say that, they are supposed to NOT pursue further collection activity until they provide proof; AND they can notify me of any legal action they plan to take, which they did 6 months after I sent the dispute.  At this time is when I requested DV; they say they don't have a lot of the info on websites NOT true?  NOWHERE have I been able to find it mandatory that "we consumers" have to send the DV within the initial 30 days.
Also, I just found tonight (had found it two years ago & marked it, just hadn't read it lately) that reinforces the fact that the CA/JDB is required to report to the bureau is a consumer disputes, which I did, but my CR only shows "consumer disputed" -
Another CA has changed their reporting as of last fall (added something new) and they've been paid; and since I sent them the latest notice that they ARE in violation for NOT reporting accurately, it NOW as of last week shows "submitted by subscriber" - thought that was kind of interesting...

Thanks for you input!
Message 1 of 5
Senior Contributor

Re: Noah? DV vs. dispute

15 USC 1692g(b)
If the consumer notifies the debt collector in writing within the thirty-day period described in subsection (a) of this section that the debt, or any portion thereof, is disputed, or that the consumer requests the name and address of the original creditor, the debt collector shall cease collection of the debt, or any disputed portion thereof, until the debt collector obtains verification of the debt or a copy of a judgment, or the name and address of the original creditor, and a copy of such verification or judgment, or name and address of the original creditor, is mailed to the consumer by the debt collector.
Their original notice must comply with 1692(a), and if not, then they are in violation.
Message 2 of 5
Established Contributor

Re: Noah? DV vs. dispute

You are the MAN!  Thank you!  Here is what I am saying IF I am allowed to talk AT all tomorrow...please, would LOVE to know what you think!  Then I have to get to bed so I'm sort of SHARP!
  • Both Federal & State law (AG Website) as well as the statement required by any Collection Agency require a consumer to DISPUTE a debt within the initial 30 days, if they dispute any or all of an account.
  • Even though cease & desist was in the initial DISPUTE notice; nowhere does the law state consumer is required to submit a request for Debt Validation within the initial 30 days.  Cease & desist still allows a CA to notify the consumer of it’s intent, which was done via Summons & Complaint; to which I promptly responded with request for Debt Validation.
  • In four months straight I received the SAME notice from (3) CAs; the same dispute letter was submitted to all (3) CAs.  I did NOT hear from the other (2); nor did I hear anything from Plaintiff until the S&C. 
  • It is NOT unreasonable for any consumer to question the validity of any debt which includes:

à         detailed account history starting with original creditor

à         copy of original signed debt agreement or credit card application

à         agreement with any client that grants them the authority to collect on the alleged debt


·         Attorney – I have submitted all paperwork to an attorney and am waiting to hear if he will take the case.

·         The company Gurstel Law Firm is attempting to collect for has ignored all letters, requests and is reporting my account twice, violation of my rights.  Want it corrected immediately.

Message Edited by beach123 on 07-05-2007 06:03 AM
Message 3 of 5
Senior Contributor

Re: Noah? DV vs. dispute

Because your original dispute contained both a C&D and a request for validation, the judge could rule that the CA still needed to validate.
Under C&D, the CA is allowed to contact you once more. There is no legal violation, in my non-legal opinion, that a CA receiving a letter demanding both C&D and validation can comply with the validation request, by either ceasing collections or validating, AND then ceasing communications.
15 USC 1692c(c)
Ceasing communication
If a consumer notifies a debt collector in writing that the consumer refuses to pay a debt or that the consumer wishes the debt collector to cease further communication with the consumer, the debt collector shall not communicate further with the consumer with respect to such debt, except -
(1) to advise the consumer that the debt collector's further efforts are being terminated;
(2) to notify the consumer that the debt collector or creditor may invoke specified remedies which are ordinarily invoked by such debt collector or creditor; or
(3) where applicable, to notify the consumer that the debt collector or creditor intends to invoke a specified remedy.
If such notice from the consumer is made by mail, notification shall be complete upon receipt.
Message 4 of 5
Established Contributor

Re: Noah? DV vs. dispute

The C&D was included with my original dispute; I responded with the DV 6 months later, upon receipt of the S&C, (they notified me of their intent to sue), I thought I still had a right to request proof THEY were in fact the one who had authority to collect...for others I have been working with on for their own credit since finding this forum though, I tell them to respond as disputed & DV immediately.
I hope the judge today does see it in my favorSmiley Happy though I'm not hopeful about it...frankly, even if they haven't violated that portion, if I just had this thing done and the reporting accurately, I'd be 115% satisfied!
I'll let you know how it goes!  Thanks for all your help!

Message Edited by beach123 on 07-05-2007 06:01 AM

Message Edited by beach123 on 07-05-2007 06:03 AM
Message 5 of 5