CN47 - out of wild curiousity... if you feel comfortable giving the figure - how much $$ have you recovered for yourself personally through lawsuits such as this? I'm just purely curious.

CN47 - out of wild curiousity... if you feel comfortable giving the figure - how much $$ have you recovered for yourself personally through lawsuits such as this? I'm just purely curious.

Lets just say well over 10k.


Whomever is owed the actual debt just hires another company.. I was told that the "file" goes back to whomever owns it and it's simply reassigned to a new collection agency. As the "new" agency hasn't been told to stop calling, they're not violating.
I disagree. Notice to the agent is notice to the principal and so forth. If you inform the agent, you are informing the company as well. If they fail to tell the next collector in line this, too bad for them.

codename47 said:CN47 - out of wild curiousity... if you feel comfortable giving the figure - how much $$ have you recovered for yourself personally through lawsuits such as this? I'm just purely curious.

Lets just say well over 10k.

If you don't mind sharing, how many times have you gone to court for this 10k+ and how much personal time do you estimate it has taken?

Are there certain things that you do to set up these kinds of collections or do they just happen to pass your way? I guess not paying your bills and being openly taken to collections is one of them...

CN47, where were you when I needed you? I would have loved to have nailed those Checks Unlimited scammers to the wall, and to have made $1000 doing so!

I would have loved to have nailed those Checks Unlimited scammers to the wall, and to have made $1000 doing so!
Well, worst case, call them back and order some more checks, go for double or nothing.

Can someone please tell me what exactly is the expected response to a request for validation (assuming the debt is valid)?
Well, as always, it depends. If it is a contractual remedy or contractual performance thing, they need to produce a signed contract that contains the language they are referring to. If it is an alleged amount owed for services, they need to detail what the services are, when they were performed, and so forth, ideally from the service provider, NOT from the collector. If it is a credit card, they need to show an account exists and what payments were made/not made, debits, credits, etc... There is no strict definition of validation per se, just something that would make a reasonable person believe they owe money under the circumstances of the case.

Spears v Brennan goes into detail about what validation should look like, and surprise, surprise it does NOT merely stop at a contract when debts are alleged to be owed and goes into requiring an accounting of the debt, debits, credits, and so forth.

http://www.creditboards.com/mambo/index.php?option=com_content&t...

"specifically, Brennan claims that a copy of the consumer credit contract between Spears and American General attached to the notice of claim provided sufficient verification of the debt within the meaning of 15 U.S.C. § 1692g(B).
We cannot agree.
The contract in no way provides sufficient verification of the debt. A review of the document reveals that it identifies only the terms of Spears’ loan, including a 17.99% annual interest rate and the original loan amount of $2,561.59. The loan agreement contains no accounting of any payments made by Spears, the dates on which those payments were made, the interest which had accrued, or any late fees which had been assessed once Spears stopped making the required payments."

I can tell you what it is not: affadavits from allison B moon (LVNV style), affadavits of debt, affadavits of lost records, billing statements from the debt collector, letters citing Chaudry v Gallerizo.

They responded with a "validation" that really doesn't have any more info than the original "bill" from the collection agency sent. It doesn't really "feel" like it would meet the requirements, but I'm not totally sure what should be in there/what to expect.
Umm, yeah if you don't feel it would meet the requirements, then it probably doesn't. You should get a big Red Stamp with "FAIL" written on it and send a copy of their validation back to them with a summons. Validation CAN NOT come from the collector. It must be obtained and forwarded to the consumer from the person that is claiming money to be owed. Think about it, if I said you owed me money, and I sent my buddy to go collect, you dispute, but my buddy can only produce letters from him to you, and can't actually get anything from me the person who is owed money, then you don't have validation. Otherwise, anyone can just make stuff up and say sums are owed when they are not.

The collector probably bought the account, the OC is out of the picture, and they can't get anything from them, yet they still want to collect. I say go talk to a consumer lawyer and sue their butts off, or if you really want to have fun, sue them pro-se. Once the lawsuit hits, they'll forget all about whatever your buddy may owe and will be begging you to take a grand or two to go away.

Can someone please tell me what exactly is the expected response to a request for validation (assuming the debt is valid)?
Well, as always, it depends. If it is a contractual remedy or contractual performance thing, they need to produce a signed contract that contains the language they are referring to. If it is an alleged amount owed for services, they need to detail what the services are, when they were performed, and so forth, ideally from the service provider, NOT from the collector. If it is a credit card, they need to show an account exists and what payments were made/not made, debits, credits, etc... There is no strict definition of validation per se, just something that would make a reasonable person believe they owe money under the circumstances of the case.

Thanks CN47 - based on what you are saying, it sounds like they haven't truly validated the debt. The only "proof" of this debt has been their letters saying they owe it. They sent a validation letter which was as follows, with no correspondence from "Big Hospital Inc" - just the letter.


Dear Bigdish's Roommate,
We are in receipt of your letter, in which you appear to be disputing this amount and requesting validation.

The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act does allow you to request validation of the debt by us, but only withing the first thirty (30) days after you receive our initial statement that sets forth the amount of the debt, the original creditor, and other disclosure information. While we believe that your request now for validation of the debt is not timely pursuant to section 809(b) of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, we will nevertheless validate the debt as you requested by providing the information below and consider your request for validation resolved.

Debtor # ABC123456789
Provider: Emergency care - Big Hospital Inc
Original Amount: $123
Current Balance: $123
Reference #: 987654321
Date of service 8/1/08

Please mail your payment in full to the above address or contact one of our representatives to set up a payment plan. If you have any further questions, please contact our Customer Service Department at 212 123-4567 or 1-800-123-4567.

Very truly yours,
Correspondence Department,
Big Bad Debt Collection, Inc.

I read the link you posted on CreditBoards, and based on that, I do not believe the proof they have shown is "reasonable" because:

• They have never shown any contract or similar showing there is indeed a valid debt (though does HIPPA come into play here making this impossible?) They quoted a few procedure codes in one of their letters, but that's it.
  
• They have not provided any form of itemized bill or similar showing payments and charges. In fact, at its heart I'm sure this is a billing error as my roommate was indeed in the hospital on the date they quoted, and his insurance was never billed for this amount according to his EOB from the insurance provider. This hospital took approximately five (5!) attempts to get them to bill the insurance at all.
  
• They have never shown any proof that they are authorized to collect a debt for Big Hospital Inc, merely that they are trying to
  
• They have provided no documents from the OC at all.

Any thoughts on a next best course of action?

Thanks!

Any thoughts on a next best course of action?
I would write back "that's not validation. Here's your lawsuit."

codename47 said:Any thoughts on a next best course of action?
I would write back "that's not validation. Here's your lawsuit."

Well, the problem is my roommate doesn't have the money to get a lawyer up front (unless you think a lawyer will take this case on the hopes of getting a portion of the winnings, and if so what the best kind of lawyer to go to is) so I'm not sure if jumping right to a lawyer is the best course of action, as opposed to another letter.

Well, the problem is my roommate doesn't have the money to get a lawyer up front (unless you think a lawyer will take this case on the hopes of getting a portion of the winnings, and if so what the best kind of lawyer to go to is) so I'm not sure if jumping right to a lawyer is the best course of action, as opposed to another letter.

Well, a CONSUMER lawyer is the only type you should even talk to about this. Go to naca.net and you can find some in your area. They may or may not be willing to take it on contingency. Just gotta ask around.

Alternatively, you could take an adventue in the legal system and sue them yourselfs. I recommend it as a good learning experience.

jclookey said:Zaos said:Interesting biz model. Buy delinquent debt at pennies to the dollar, have a half decent recovery rate (let's say 50% after the BS fees), and the few k to CN47 is just a cost of doing biz. I think we can live with that.

I'm thinking this would be a awesome pasttime for a student that wasn't able to get a summer job.

dude CN47 would own you but I see your point.... good business model if you want to be scum!

No no, I meant going after outfits like NCS. Actually buying the debt and stuff would be too much work and require too much up front investment.