cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

I tried a DV, now I don't know what to do...

scoppe
New Contributor

I tried a DV, now I don't know what to do...

I got a letter from Capital Mgnt back in Feb, sent them a DV in March, got the green card back signed March 6, and havent' heard another thing from them.
 
The OC is reporting as a CO with a DOLA of Jan '03, and CA isn't reporting at all.  It's out of SOL for Fl.
 
Any idea's where I go from here?
 
 
 
 

Starting Score: EQ 650 TU ???
Current Score: EQ 683 TU 777
Goal Score: EQ 750 TU 800


Take the FICO Fitness Challenge
Message 1 of 17
16 REPLIES 16
llecs
Moderator Emeritus

Re: I tried a DV, now I don't know what to do...



scoppe wrote:
I got a letter from Capital Mgnt back in Feb, sent them a DV in March, got the green card back signed March 6, and havent' heard another thing from them.
 
The OC is reporting as a CO with a DOLA of Jan '03, and CA isn't reporting at all.  It's out of SOL for Fl.
 
Any idea's where I go from here?

IMO, legally, a CA has an indefinite time to validate a DV, they just can't engage in collection activities (calls, letters) during that period. Some would argue that reporting is collection activity, but there is no specific court case that I'm aware of that addresses this.
 
Below is a letter I disagree with on a legal standpoint, but some have reported success by using it. I'd say give it a try........................Be sure to edit this letter.
 
 
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.
You recieved a request for validation from me on 9/18/07. You have not responded to that request in any way, and since that time you have updated information on my Experian credit report on 10/10/07 and on my Equifax report TWICE on 10/15/07.  Each of these updates constitutes a 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.
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 they 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. You have 5 days from the receipt of this letter to remove this account from any and all reporting agencies, or a complaint to the FTC will be immediately filed for each and every violation from 9/18/07 until this issue is resolved. It is common knowledge that your company often violates these laws and I have no doubt that if I choose to litigate that you will be held liable for your actions. It is my hope that you will comply with the law in order to avoid the hassle.
Thank You,
TYPE NAME

Message 2 of 17
Moderator Emeritus

Re: I tried a DV, now I don't know what to do...




llecs wrote:
 
Some would argue that reporting is collection activity, but there is no specific court case that I'm aware of that addresses this.


The only thing I know of that addresses this is an FTC opinion that says reporting is a collection activity. My state's AG supports that opinion as well.
 
State AG link that discusses it-  scroll towards the bottom
 
 
FTC opinion -
 

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free Annual Reports, Freq. Requested Threads, 5 Things We Don't Talk About, Common Abbreviations, Where do I start?, State Resources
Message 3 of 17
Moderator Emeritus

Re: I tried a DV, now I don't know what to do...



scoppe wrote:
I got a letter from Capital Mgnt back in Feb, sent them a DV in March, got the green card back signed March 6, and havent' heard another thing from them.
 
The OC is reporting as a CO with a DOLA of Jan '03, and CA isn't reporting at all.  It's out of SOL for Fl.
 
Any idea's where I go from here?
 

I DV'd a CA after receiving a letter as well. Never heard from them and they aren't reporting. I asked what I should do and was told just to keep my copies of the DV letter, GC, CM label in case they appear.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free Annual Reports, Freq. Requested Threads, 5 Things We Don't Talk About, Common Abbreviations, Where do I start?, State Resources
Message 4 of 17
llecs
Moderator Emeritus

Re: I tried a DV, now I don't know what to do...



sidewinder wrote:



llecs wrote:
 
Some would argue that reporting is collection activity, but there is no specific court case that I'm aware of that addresses this.


The only thing I know of that addresses this is an FTC opinion that says reporting is a collection activity. My state's AG supports that opinion as well.
 
State AG link that discusses it-  scroll towards the bottom
 
 
FTC opinion -
 

 



I saw that opinion too. Unfortunately it is only one opinion of many at the FTC, it is old, and it never had any influence on any court case, as far as I can tell. What we need is a good court case that specifically and directly addresses whether or not a CA reporting consititutes collection activity.
 
IMO, that opinion would not hold up in court if you based an argument on one attorney's opinion. Odds are he is not even working there anymore.
 
We need a volunteer from this forum willing to test all of this. Anyone? I'd nominate Timothy myself.
Message 5 of 17
HappyDays
Moderator Emeritus

Re: I tried a DV, now I don't know what to do...

Please don't make me go digging this out.   It was a JUDGE that said that reporting was concidered COLLECTION activity!!!!
Message 6 of 17
llecs
Moderator Emeritus

Re: I tried a DV, now I don't know what to do...



HappyDays wrote:
Please don't make me go digging this out.   It was a JUDGE that said that reporting was concidered COLLECTION activity!!!!


I'll change my tune if it specifically addresses this issue. Is it on any of the letters in this forum? How about in the above opinion letter?
Message 7 of 17
Moderator Emeritus

Re: I tried a DV, now I don't know what to do...



HappyDays wrote:
Please don't make me go digging this out.   It was a JUDGE that said that reporting was concidered COLLECTION activity!!!!


HappyDays............sorry I didn't know that. I knew that the FTC opinion stated it was, but wasn't aware it was ever challenged in court. I'll look around on-line and see if I can find it.
 
ETA:  Was it the Twyla Boatley case?
 
 
 
 

 


Message Edited by sidewinder on 05-05-2008 06:08 AM
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free Annual Reports, Freq. Requested Threads, 5 Things We Don't Talk About, Common Abbreviations, Where do I start?, State Resources
Message 8 of 17
Moderator Emeritus

Re: I tried a DV, now I don't know what to do...



llecs wrote:


HappyDays wrote:
Please don't make me go digging this out.   It was a JUDGE that said that reporting was concidered COLLECTION activity!!!!


I'll change my tune if it specifically addresses this issue. Is it on any of the letters in this forum? How about in the above opinion letter?


I just re-read the follow up DV and it does say it in there.  States "In the case 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."

Yes, it is on the opinion letter.




-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free Annual Reports, Freq. Requested Threads, 5 Things We Don't Talk About, Common Abbreviations, Where do I start?, State Resources
Message 9 of 17
llecs
Moderator Emeritus

Re: I tried a DV, now I don't know what to do...



sidewinder wrote:


llecs wrote:


HappyDays wrote:
Please don't make me go digging this out.   It was a JUDGE that said that reporting was concidered COLLECTION activity!!!!


I'll change my tune if it specifically addresses this issue. Is it on any of the letters in this forum? How about in the above opinion letter?


I just re-read the follow up DV and it does say it in there.  States "In the case 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."

Yes, it is on the opinion letter.


The Boatley case never addressed whether reporting during the DV period was considered collection activity or not. Boatley was looking for a judgment in her favor by bringing up that issue. However the judge never did rule on that point because the Defendant (the CA) never offered proof that they sent a dunning letter to begin with. If they had, the judge would have to rule on that issue. Moreover, the central issue was whether or not a CA should mark the account as "in dispute" as they should have done.
 
I commented on this case in here:
 
 
Message 10 of 17
Advertiser Disclosure: The offers that appear on this site are from third party advertisers from whom FICO receives compensation.