How To Beat Debt Collectors At Their Game

Last month I focused a lot on 3rd party debt collectors going after foreclosed homeowners and the deficiency they feel they are entitled to. This month, I'm going to go more into detail on how to beat these collection companies no matter what type of collection account they are on the warpath for money over.

If you receive a notice in the mail from a debt collector telling you that you now owe them for some debt, maybe its a medical collection or a charged off credit card, or even the difference left over after a car repo, it should tell you clearly that you have 30 days to dispute the debt.  If the first contact you have with a debt collection company is that they call you on the phone, you can confirm your name if you want, but do not confirm your birth date, your social security number, your phone number, your address, or anything else.  Do not acknowledge that alleged debt.  Tell them you do not communicate with companies like theirs over the phone and if they have something to say to you, they can put it in writing and mail it to you.

Once you have received that letter, its time to start the fight. You want to immediately fire off a letter disputing the alleged debt and demanding validation.  I go so far as to not even call their account number an account number. Its a reference number.  I do this because there is no way I'm going to acknowledge that my client has an account with them.  This is their own made up account number to try and make you think their claim is legitimate. So, this is where you start to fight back.

Your validation letter should tell them that you are responding to their letter and you do dispute their claims. In fact, you will need them to validate and prove to you that you owe them that alleged debt.  You see, there may be some alleged debt, but do you owe it?  That's what they need to prove.  Don't fall for the lame Chaudhry minimum standard of "verification" of the alleged debt. You don't need verification and they can't provide that anyhow since they are a 3rd party.

You are demanding validation, which is the proof, the documentation that supports their claim.  You are entitled to receive from them a copy of the contract showing you agreed to do business with them. That means that the contract names them as the creditor that actually lent something to you of value, and your name agreeing to compensate them or pay them back for what they claim they lent you.  Then it has to have your signature on it.  A contract between you and the alleged original creditor is not a contract between you and the 3rd party collector and it isn't full validation.

You will also need to tell them to provide proof that they own the alleged debt or that they have been authorized to demand payment, which means its been assigned to them by the original creditor.  Sometimes they will send a bill of sale, and that doesn't happen too often, and occasionally though rare, they'll send you a copy of their assignment. But sending this, even with a copy of the original agreement, is not full validation.

You are also entitled to ask them to provide a full accounting.  This is not just 3 years(or however many they send) of billing statements but also means an accounting ledger. The accounting ledger should show every charge, every fee, interest added, credits, debits, payments, every single event that changed the amount on the alleged account. Billing statements that show what was charged that month is important too because you have the right to say, "Hey, I didn't buy that or authorize that." Leave that for the courtroom though.  We never want to admit anything to a 3rd party debt collector.

You will also want to tell them that since they furnished information to your credit reports, they are required to have your consent to do so in writing, so they need to provide a copy of that consent or authorization.  They won't be able to provide this but this only helps remove them from the credit report. It is not part of validation and will not mean they have to stop trying to collect if they can't produce it.

A couple other things to ask for is proof that the alleged debt is not outside the statute of limitations and if you're in a state that requires licensing and/or bonding, you need to have copies of those documents as well. You also have the right to ask for a full chain of assignment, which means every collector that has ever had it in their possession, and proof that their collection fees are agreed to in the original contract. Heck you can actually even tell them that you have a right to know how much they paid for the alleged debt because that is closer to the phony baloney amount they should be trying to collect.

After you dispute with them and demand validation, you want to write to each of the credit bureaus and dispute each of the collections with them. You will do this about a week or two after you send the letters to the collectors.  This is very important because once you demand validation from a debt collector, they are required to stop all collection activity. Verifying with credit bureaus is considered collection activity and if they do it before they send you validation, they've just broken the law.  They actually need to remove the information they have furnished while its in dispute.  

Many times you will see comments on your credit report saying that "consumer disputes" or similar language.  If those comments are on a 3rd party collection account, that is a violation of law and proof that they are breaking it. Since communicating via the credit report is considered collection activity, putting a "dispute" comment on there doesn't void the fact that they are still trying to collect when they are supposed to stop all collection activity.  Its just proof that they are ignorant of the law or they don't give a rip about the law.  We're going to jump back to bureau disputes in a bit.

Now, when debt collectors respond to your dispute and demand for validation, many times they will send you the name, amount and a few tidbits of information about the alleged original account and then tell you that they have verified.  They haven't, that's hearsay. If they send you any documentation, it might look like they've proved the alleged debt, but its not validation. Its not proof you owe them.

Your response is a very important part of beating them.  You don't want to attack their response until you get the results from your bureau disputes though.  This is because not all of the collectors will usually reply to your demand to validation but they will respond to the bureau dispute by claiming they verified it.  That's a big NO-NO.  You are also going to want to check those bureau disputes and see which collectors were stupid enough to comment that the alleged account is disputed.  You will be using these things against them and this is very effective to make them hit the road.

Now that you've received your bureau dispute results back and the debt collectors that have bothered to respond to your demand to validation are pretty much all back to you, its time to contact the collection companies again.  For those that told you they are closing the file and notifying the bureaus, you don't need to send anything to them.  Just make sure they actually deleted. If they didn't you will dispute that again with the bureaus.  For those that claimed they verified, you need to get real tough with them.

Your response to those who claimed they validated or verified in response to your demand for validation, you need to tell them something like this:  "I've received your letter claiming you have validated (or verified) the above reference number. But the problem is, you didn't provide the documentation that proves I owe you anything.  Where is the contract between your company and me? Where is the full accounting because I can't just take your word for it that I owe some company I've never contracted with, some made up number?  Where is your license and bond?  In fact, from what you sent, I can see that you are trying to collect for something that is outside the statute of limitations for my state (if that is the case).  

You also haven't proved you have any right to be on my credit report because I know for a fact I've never contracted with you nor consented to you being able to make any communication on my credit reports.  You're violating the FDCPA by continuing collection activity and you're violating the FCRA by furnishing information and verifying unvalidated information, disputed information, erroneous information, when no access to my credit reports has ever been granted to you.

So, get your crap off my credit reports until you can provide some proof that I actually owe YOU! You haven't done that yet and by law, you are to cease collection activity immediately.  I reject your hearsay as being validation or verification. I reject the bills you sent as being validation because they are not. I reject any of your claims of validation or verification because you haven't proved anything."

That's pretty much how a follow up letter is written.  Now, for those that verified with the bureaus but didn't bother to even respond to your demand for validation, you should send them a letter similar to what I just gave you but blast them for verifying without even responding to your demand for validation.  You can even tell them that you intend to sue them for their FCRA and FDCPA violations if they don't remove this reference number and information they furnished to the bureaus from your reports.

Now, your follow up letters to the bureaus will be to dispute each one as having demanded validation from each one and they have not validated and therefore are still Unverified so please delete ASAP.  By the next time you get your responses back from the bureaus, you should see some great results.   Sometimes though, they just don't have any respect for the law and they keep leaving their bs on your report. You may need to keep attacking them month after month to remove these stubborn ones.

I hope that those of you who are working to improve your credit will take this information and use it.  It does work.  Its a basic attack and it's based on laws written to protect you from scum like debt collectors.  Remember, you don't owe these punks so fight to keep your hard earned money in your own pockets, not theirs.  Its your right to spend your money as you want, not give it over to these extortionists who will continue to harass you in an attempt to steal it from you if you don't knock them down and out of your lives.

Now, for those of you that want help with removing collections, we are extending our Christmas special into the New Year!  We use advanced techniques and put laws, case law, statutes, Supreme Court rulings and more in the debt collectors' faces. We go well beyond the attack shown above to get you the fastest results possible, all while staying ethical, honest, and within the law. Our special is valid through January 31, 2015.

Our special will save you anywhere from $100 - $300 depending upon the number of collections on your report, as well as other derogatory items.  To qualify for the special, you need to have at least FOUR 3rd party collectors furnishing information on your report.  You will need copies of your credit reports for all 3 major bureaus so get them together and contact us so we can help you have a new, pretty credit report in this exciting New Year!  My email address and phone number are up on the top right hand side of this blog.  I look forward to hearing from you and helping you fight the debt collectors and win!

If you have found this blog helpful to you, please consider donating as a sign of your appreciation for information I have freely given to you.  The "Donate" button is on the right side bar.  Thank you for your generosity.

Validation Vs. Verification ~ Defeating the Chaudhry Claim of Debt Collectors

I have not written anything lately because for one, I have been very busy but the second reason is because sometimes I just don't know what would be a good topic to cover.  However, I'm working on a couple lawsuits for clients right now and today, my client sent me the plaintiff's response to her Motion to Dismiss.  The whole entire thing looks like it was put together by an intern with no experience writing briefs or no consistency of thought. Its like they decided to whine that nothing was relevant so boohoo, the court should not grant her motion.  They threw all kinds of stuff into their response, and as I have been researching, I came across a website that had one whole section that was word for word verbatim of one of the points in their response.  Can you say "copy/paste"?  So lame!

Anyhow, the one thing that jumped out at me is the forever favorite fall back case law that they quote, Chaudhry v. Gallerizzo.  Now, I have written about this case law and how to throw other case law back in the collection agency's face.  But here's the problem.  Our court system has what are called "Circuit courts" and they represent sections of the country.  I'm in the 9th Circuit designation.  Unfortunately, many of these circuit courts have upheld the Chaudhry decision for collection lawsuits so you need to know how to fight back.

The Chaudhry case upheld a very minimum standard for Verification.  But, you shouldn't be sending a "Verification" letter to collectors.  Verification is what credit bureaus do.  You send collectors "Validation" letters.  Though it may seem that verification and validation are the same thing, they are NOT!  Collectors love to use the word interchangeably but we need to stand firm on this.  Validation is the Proof. Verification according to the Chaudhry decision, is making sure they have the right person.  They only have to provide you with the Original creditor name, account number, dates, amount owed to supposedly prove that they are attempting to collect from the correct person.   They claim that they don't have to provide detailed records.  They may get away with that explanation during the dispute process, and they might get away with it in court, but not if you know more about Verification and Validation.

The best way I think to explain this so you can beat these lying vultures, is to bring legal resources into the argument.  You start with defining the two words.  Now, I look through many different legal dictionaries that would have some standing in court. You want to build a case against the collector through the dispute process so that you have this folder full of a documented paper trail where you have taken it to them and they continue to violate the law.  That way, when you've had enough, you have the ammunition to sue them, or you have the case built to defend yourself if they take you to court first. Hopefully, there won't have to be any litigation and you can get rid of them by showing them how they will fail if it goes to court.

Validation according to Black's Law Dictionary is "Assessing an action to determine it is complete, correct, implemented and delivering the correct outcome." I actually like the definition given by the Oxford Dictionaries better.  To "Validate" means "to check or prove the validity or accuracy of something" and "Validation" is a derivative of the word "Validate."  Now, did you notice that it means to "PROVE" the accuracy?  This is important.  My favorite definition that is very clear comes from Merriam-Webster, which says "to show the existence or truth of, by evidence." Remember this while I give you the definition of "Verify."

Verification according to Black's Law Dictionary is "... averment that the party pleading is ready to establish the truth of what he has set forth." Also, it goes on to say, "The examination of a writing for the purpose of ascertaining its truth; or a certificate or affidavit that it is true." Now, it also gives some case law and you will see how these collectors fall short.  The court said "Confirmation of the correctness, truth, or authenticity of a pleading, account, or other paper, by an affidavit, oath, or deposition." McDonald v. Rosengarten, 134 111. 126, 25 N. E. ; and Summerfield v. Phoenix Assur. Co. (C. C-) 65 Fed. 296; and Patterson v. Brooklyn, 6 App. Div. 127, 40 N.Y. Supp. 581.

Did you catch what these definitions are saying?  Its saying that "Validation" is the documented proof. Its not just "yeah, we have the right person and here's what you owe and who the original creditor is that you incurred the debt with." Oh, no.  Not even close!  Validation is the PROOF!!!  Don't forget that.  You demand validation, you demand proof.  You are not demanding hearsay, which is what they give you. Hang on to this stuff. Its powerful and important.  I'm so not done destroying their claim of "verification" yet.

Okay, let's tear apart their claim of "Verification."  Did you notice that not just in the definition, but in the supporting case law, that "verification" is them attesting to or certifying or confirming that their claims are true and they can prove it in court?  That's what verification is.  It is swearing under oath that you can prove your claims.  I'm going to break this down for you even more.  When in court, who can testify as a witness?  The answer is, a person with FIRST HAND KNOWLEDGE!  They saw something for themselves, they had the conversation, they were a party to whatever situation, etc.  If they do not have first hand knowledge and try to testify that they heard that the defendant told the other person something or the company claimed that the defendant ran up the debt---STOP RIGHT THERE!  That's HEARSAY and not allowed in court.  Its not evidence of squat!

Oh but there's so much more regarding verification.  A 3rd party collector CANNOT themselves verify any alleged debt.  Why? Look at the last couple paragraphs above.  They were not on the original contract. They were not a party to the original transaction.  They were not personally involved from the get go nor were they employees of the original creditor nor did they ever personally handle the alleged account when it was with the original creditor.  All they can provide is "Hearsay."   Now let's look at what the FDCPA says about verification.  I'm tying this all together and you will see very soon how you can whip their butts with this stuff.

The FDCPA regarding "Verification" and "Validation" of debts is found in 1692g. I'm going to show you how they do not verify nor validate when you demand validation. It is found in (b) of 1692g.  Here's a portion of that which is very important. It says, "...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."  I capitalized the "AND" for emphasis.  They have to send you a copy of the verification.  What is verification again?  It is swearing under oath that they can provide the proof.  How many times have you received a response from a 3rd party collector that has the name of the original creditor, amount of debt, relevant dates, etc. accompanied by a notarized statement from the original creditor "verifying" that they have the proof and are willing and able to testify with first hand knowledge that the 3rd party's claim are valid?  I'm willing to bet that 99.99% of you will say "NEVER!!"

They don't send a statement from the original creditor, sworn under oath, by someone authorized, willing and able to testify in court. That means, they never truly verify the alleged debt. When they send copies of statements, computer printouts, letters claiming they consulted with the original creditor or checked their records, they send you the name, address, amount, etc., but no notarized statement from the original creditor, remember this:  They have not validated, they have not verified, they have failed.  

So they can throw the Chaudhry v. Gallerizzo case at you all they want. They can throw other case law at you like Graziano v. Harrison claiming that computer printouts are sufficient. But, if they lack true verification, a notarized statement by a qualified representative of the original creditor that they attest to the validity of the alleged debt and will testify as much with the documentation, in court, they have failed at validation. They have failed at verification. They have not qualified their claim to allow them to resume or continue collection activity in accordance with the FDCPA.  

That's how you shoot down their bs. That's how you take it to them in your disputes and in your lawsuits, whether initiated by them or you. That's how you should win!

I'd love to hear from you.  If you have questions, email me or call me. If you don't want to repair your credit by yourself, I'd love to help you. Again email me or call me.  My information is up at the top on the right hand side. If you loved this information and it helps you, please leave a comment below.  I don't allow spam with links to porn sites or substandard credit repair sites to post.  But, I love legitimate comments and recommendations for more credit repair topics you'd like me to cover.  Those will be approved right away.

If you have found this blog helpful to you, please consider donating as a sign of your appreciation for information I have freely given to you.  The "Donate" button is on the right side bar.  Thank you for your generosity.

Challenging Chaudhry v. Gallerizzo From A Collection Agency

If you have been working on repairing your credit and you have sent validation letters to collection agencies, you probably have received or will receive a semi-form letter back saying that they have verified the account and they are correct.  Then they will put in a little modified excerpt from the Chaudrhy v. Gallerizzo case decision to justify their laziness and to deceive you into just accepting their false claim against you.  The modified excerpt looks like this:

"verification of a debt involves nothing more than the debt collector confirming in writing that the debt being demanded is what the creditor is claiming is owed. The debt collector is not required to keep or provide detailed evidence of the alleged debt."

When I see this in a response for one of my clients, I crack up because it just blares out to me that they don't have anything.  You see, the Chaudrhy decision is not about validation with a collection agency!!  They take a small piece of the decision and quote it, but they fail to tell you that it has nothing to do with them, has nothing to do with validation, and further, you didn't request "verification", you requested "Validation" and that is something different.  

Just so you know, the Chaudrhy decision was about legal fees.  The verification of the legal fees was being challenged and the court said that the law firm just had to confirm in writing that the fees they were claiming were the fees that were owed.  Legal fees are not collections, unless it has been assigned or sold to a collector.  Legal fees are fees that the attorney charges for services rendered.  Since when do collectors render services that you "hired" them to perform for you?  I'll answer that for you --> NEVER!!

The best way to challenge this type of letter is to send a follow up letter letting them know that you are not an uninformed idiot and that their feeble attempt at validation doesn't even come close to the legal requirements set forth in the FDCPA and appropriate case law.  I usually use some of that language in my response letters and then I follow up with laws to defend my demand for validation and what is required.  They are in the business of collecting and they are supposed to know the law, yet they are usually fairly ignorant, deceptive to consumers and flagrantly in violation of the law.

Here is a sample of what I put in my letters that you can modify and use against these obnoxious criminals. (Yes, I consider them criminals because they consistently break the law and commit extortion, mail fraud, violation of the RICO Act (racketeering, etc.), and violating both the FDCPA  and FCRA, among other illegal acts.)

 Dear Sirs, (you can put in the name that they may put on their letter or say To Whom it May Concern, what ever is your fancy)

I am in receipt of your letter dated 01/01/13 in which you claim you have verified the account which I am disputing and in which you attempt to quote a portion of the Chaudrhy case decision to justify your response or to attempt to deceive me, or both.  Please understand, your feeble attempt at validation is a joke.  In fact, you claim you verified when I didn't request verification, as we both know that verification is merely requesting that you have the right name, address, account number and original creditor.  Further, your verification doesn't meet the criteria as defined in Black's Law Dictionary which includes being able to testify to the verification under oath.  I Demanded Validation, which you did not provide.

Since  you are supposedly professional collectors, you should be aware that if you fail to validate, you are barred from "verifying" with the bureaus as that is collection activity, which is barred until full validation has been accomplished.  The Chaudrhy case is not about debt collectors and validation, it is about attorneys' fees.  Maybe your incompetence and laziness has prevented you from actually reading the entire case and the entire court decision.

I am requesting from you AGAIN, Validation.  Here is what I want from you:  The alleged contract with both my wet ink signature and your employee's signature establishing that we have agreed to do business together.  Provide proof that at least the four main elements of a contract have been met.  Provide me with the alleged contract between the alleged original creditor and me, and proof that at least the four main elements of a contract have been met.  Provide me with proof that you have the legal right to collect this alleged debt.  Provide a full accounting for the alleged account - all charges, payments, interest accrued, all fees, and the corresponding dates for which every event occurred.  (Spears v. Brennan).  Prove also that this alleged debt is not time barred, or in simpler terms for feeble minds, outside of my state's statute of limitations.

Please be aware that because you put on the bottom of your letter that it was an attempt to collect a debt, you are already in violation of the FDCPA, and until you validate, you are guilty of mail fraud, racketeering, extortion, and a slew of other felony violations of the law.  So, until you fully and legally validate as I have requested, or rather, have demanded from you, you are required by law to cease all collection activity.  Should you fail to validate within ____ days, you are to delete any and all references and reportings of this fraudulent and alleged debt from every credit bureau and or repository to which you have reported it to and you are banned from ever selling or assigning this alleged debt to another collector, as that would be another violation of law by conspiring to harass and extort again, along with other violations of law.

I then go on to quote some samples of collection activity, give them a certain number of days in which to comply with my demand for validation and usually put in a limited cease and desist.  Sometimes I add some more case law to back up my requirements for validation.  I also usually put in there that I am not requesting verification but am demanding validation pursuant to the FDCPA 15 USC 1692g Sec. 809 (b).  Then I end it with a Sincerely, and my client's name.

So, don't be afraid to send another letter challenging their arrogance and deception.  You don't have to be sweet and nice, because, when are they?  And why would you be nice to law breakers?  I don't care if the original debt was actually yours. It doesn't matter anymore.  You don't owe it to the original creditor anymore because they charged it off and got tax credits, got reimbursed from the insurance that they had on it, and they made profit by selling it.  They made money 3 times just in those ways, but they also made money from every dime you paid on it since it was created out of thin air and they never actually lent any real money to you in the first place.

So, fight, fight, fight, and challenge, dispute and challenge some more.  Its your legal right and like I always say,  "just like when you're a defendant in court, the burden of proof is not on you, it is on them."  Make them prove it.  Oh, one last thing.  They can't legally prove it!  If you want to know why, read some of my other posts regarding AmJur and "Subrogation."  You will be pleased with what you learn!

If you have any questions or comments, please hit the comment button below. (I love questions and comments).   I will respond to you.  If you have questions that you don't want to post on here, you can email me.  The link to that is up at the top right of this blog!

If you have found this blog helpful to you, please consider donating as a sign of your appreciation for information I have freely given to you.  The "Donate" button is on the right side bar.  Thank you for your generosity.