How would you handle this

[Anonymous]

I have an old HSBC account this is still within SOL. Balance is about 750 dollars.

I just received a letter from some attorney indicating that HBLC is now the owner of said account and have retained this attorney to file suit against me. Thats the entire body of the email. At the bottom, it says "pursuant to the FDCPA, this letter shall serve as validation of the debt. The following is the informaiton which we are required to provide to you in a validation letter" Then it has the OC, Balance, account number, and address of OC. 

I dont think this is proper validation, correct?

Should I send the attorney a validation letter requesting specific info?

Should I pay? This firm isnt on by CR, but I have the money to pay..

Thanks for your help. 

B

[RobertEG]

Dear Sir,

 

I thank you for your totally informal and unprofessional communication advising me of your interest in pursuing collection  on  the named account.

 

But you have neglected some serious legal obligations.

 

You made an initial communication with me regarding the collection of a debt.

Under FDCPA 809(a), you are required to fully communicate to me, in writing, within five days of any initial communication to me, my full “dunning rights,” which in legal terms are my rights specified under FDCPA(a)(1)-(5).

 

I have not yet seen such any such written communication from you, and thus hold you in violation of federal law, FDCPA 809(a).

 

Your threats to take legal action, particularly without first advising me of my legal rights to first verify the debt under FDCPA 809(b), are considered by me to be false and misleading representations, in violation of FDCPA 807, and an unfair collection practice under FDCPA 808.

 

Your purported “verification” of the alleged debt has no significance.   Until such time as I present to you a written request for debt verification under FDCPA 809(b), you cannot respond to any issues that I raise in my dispute.  The cart does not preceed the horse/

   

Sincerely,

Message Edited by RobertEG on 04-26-2009 05:17 PM

[Anonymous]

Im sorry, I should have clarified. The dunning portion is included, at the bottom of the letter. That said, I still dont think what this attorney sent is validation. Right? 

[Anonymous]

Copied below is a section of a FTC opinion letter. You can read the full letter here.

In answer to question #1: Section 809 of the FDCPA does not prescribe any effective date for a Section 809(b) verification. Therefore, providing a verification which pre-dates the debtor's dispute does not appear to be a violation of that Section.

Do you agree with what they provided?

If so, if it were me I would offer a pay for not reporting.