DON'T BLINDLY ACCEPT A CREDITOR OR COLLECTOR'S CLAIM OF VERIFICATION

 Have you been disputing with your creditors and collection agencies to correct their records and information they furnish to the credit reporting agencies only to receive a response that they have verified their records and the information will remain the same, with the bonus of a dispute comment being added?

Did they validate or prove their claim? In order to do that, they need to send the documentation to substantiate the correctness of the information they hold on you. Did they send that? Probably not. The most you usually get will be several months, possibly years of billing statements. Maybe part of a contract. Well, you won't get that from 3rd party collectors in most cases because they have no contract with you.  They may some portion of a contract from the alleged original creditor but not any with them.

So what do billing statements prove? Not a contract, nor a valid contract. They don't represent a full accounting. They don't represent anything you should be asking them to provide. Sometimes in my letters I specifically tell them NOT to send any billing statements because they don't prove anything I need to support their claim. They either don't read or don't give a rip because that's the most common thing I get other than a letter with a hearsay statement that their info is right.

So, they really don't prove their claim at all.  How about Verification. Do they actually verify their claim or just say they did because they are so used to lying? What they send you is "hearsay." I'll touch again on that in a moment but let's explore "Verification." 

I'm going to start with Black's Law Dictionary for a legal definition of Verification. Then I'll show you what the Federal Code defines Verification as being.

 Verification: Black's Law Dictionary "... averment that the party pleading is ready to establish the truth of what he has set forth." "The examination of a writing for the purpose of ascertaining its truth; or a certificate or affidavit that it is true."

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.

It is swearing under oath that you can prove your claims.  When in court, who can testify as a witness?  The answer is, a person with FIRST HAND KNOWLEDGE! 

Now let's see what the Federal Code says is needed for Verification:

28 USC 1746 – UNSWORN VERIFICATION

Wherever, under any law of the United States or under any rule, regulation, order, or requirement made pursuant to law, any matter is required or permitted to be supported, evidenced, established, or proved by the sworn declaration, verification, certificate, statement, oath, or affidavit, in writing of the person making the same (other than a deposition, or an oath of office, or an oath required to be taken before a specified official other than a notary public), such matter may, with like force and effect, be supported, evidenced, established, or proved by the unsworn declaration, certificate, verification, or statement, in writing of such person which is subscribed by him, as true under penalty of perjury, and dated, in substantially the following form:

(1)

If executed without the United States: “I declare (or certify, verify, or state) under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on (date).

(Signature)”.

(2)

If executed within the United States, its territories, possessions, or commonwealths: “I declare (or certify, verify, or state) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on (date).

(Signature)”.

So, I would bet at least 99% of those reading this post that have ever received a response letter from a creditor, collector, or credit bureau claiming the information is verified has received a true verification. They don't dare state anything under Penalty of Perjury. That to me means they know they are lying to you and don't want that verification to be used against them in court.

Now back to hearsay. According to Black's Law Dictionary, verification is sworn testimony. Testimony must be based on one's first hand knowledge. Testimony must be supported by documentation. If you don't provide the documentation, then there's no supported testimony. If you have documentation but no sworn testimony, how do you know if the documents are accurate?  To avoid "hearsay," you need both the documentation AND the testimony.

Here's case law that clearly shows you that what you are receiving from these credit thugs is hearsay, unproven, not validated, and not verified:

“Testimony, whether live or in the form of an affidavit, to the effect that the witness has reviewed a loan file and that the loan file shows that the debtor is in default is hearsay and incompetent; rather, the records must be introduced after a proper foundation is provided.” New England Savings Bank v. Bedford Realty Corp., 238 Conn. 745, 680 A.2d 301, 308-09 (1996), later opinion, 246 Conn. 594, 717 A.2d 713 (1998); Cole Taylor Bank v. Corrigan, supra, 230 Ill.App.3d 122, 595 N.E.2d 177, 181 (2d Dist. 1992).

“It is the business records that constitute the evidence, not the testimony of the witness referring to them.” (In re A.B., 308 Ill.App. 3d 227, 719 N.E.2d 348 (2d Dist. 1999)

I like to tell these credit and collection companies that they forgot to provide the verification and forgot to provide the documentation they claim is accurate with their response, and therefore they haven't proven diddly squat. 

What you can take from this post is that they don't prove their claims, They don't validate, they don't verify. They lie, they slander you on your credit reports and you need to reject their claim until they provide the documented proof you are entitled to receive along with the sworn or unsworn verification, signed and dated under Penalty of Perjury. That's what the law says they need to do. That's what the courts have upheld that they need to do. You need to be stubborn on this. Keep all your records and be diligent. Hold your ground and refuse to accept their lies.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Have you been sued by a debt collector recently? We can help. You need to act fast.

Do you need help with credit repair? We can help. We have 2 programs. Full credit repair assistance and DIY credit repair assistance.  

Visit our Credit Repair and Lawsuit Services page if you're interested in getting the help you may need.

Click Here for Services page

Raise It or You Waive It

Whether you are disputing information regarding a derogatory account from a creditor or an alleged account with a 3rd party collector, you need to be specific about what is wrong with how they are reporting that item on your credit report.  You need to raise the issues in your dispute letters and hold them accountable to prove it.

With an original creditor, you will most likely be disputing the amount of the balance they claim is owed after they charge it off.  Here are some thing you should be disputing:

• There is no balance because they claim to have charged off the account and it is a FACT that there is insurance on each account to protect the creditor  against asset loss.  Did they receive monies from an insurance claim that paid off the alleged account balance?
• Did they even fund the account or did you?  
• Did they take tax credits?
• Are they the creditor or really just the servicer?
• Did they disclose that they were charging you for the insurance premium to protect against asset loss?
• Did they get your approval in writing agreeing to the amount of the premium as require by law?
• Did they get the insurance payoff prior to charging off the account?
• Is the contract creating the account even valid since they lacked full disclosure and equal risk?
• Do they even have a certified copy of the original contract bearing both your signature and their authorized representative's signature?
• Can they provide a full accounting showing every charge, every payment, every fee, every interest charge, every credit -including the insurance claim monies received, and any other amount along with the date each event occurred? *This does not mean they get to send you monthly billing statements. They need a full history document).

All of these questions are threatening to an "original creditor" because if they are truthful, they will have to admit that the contract was not valid, they lent you nothing, you covered the premium for the insurance for their benefit, the insurance paid off the account prior to charging off the account, and YOU funded the account, not them.  They need to respond point by point on each issue raised and provide documentation for everything they claim. Plus, verification requires a sworn affidavit, so that's how you need to tell them to respond.

With a 3rd party collector you should be raising some of these issues if not all of them:

• Were you named on the original contract with the original creditor?
• If not, do you have a contract between your company and me, signed by both parties?
• If not, produce the document authorizing the release of my information from the original creditor to you (Power of Attorney), signed by me. It is against the law for a creditor to share your information to any party other than the account holder without their authorization. Giving your information to a 3rd party without your knowledge or consent is perpetrating identity theft,
• Do you have first hand knowledge about everything that has transpired with the alleged account, including when the account allegedly belonged to the original creditor and any other parties prior to your acquisition?
• Do you have written consent to collect information about me and to share information about me with the credit reporting agencies - in writing, signed by me? 

When you receive a response back and it doesn't respond to each issue raised and doesn't include certified documentation backing up each response, you must call them out on their failure to validate.  Again, verification is the sworn testimony so they also should be responding to you in that format. Validation is the documentation backing up their testimony. One without the other is hearsay and inadmissible.

You always need to respond to their response and raise the point that they did NOT provide the answers and documentation you requested. You need to raise the point that they did not respond with a sworn affidavit of verification. They failed to validate. They failed to prove their claim. They are in default in their response/lack of response to the dispute and issues raised.  If you do not respond and call them out, you waive your right to claim they did not prove you owe them or that there is a valid contract.

I ALWAYS include the Maxim of Law - Silence Equates to Acquiescence (Agreement) in each of my letters.  This tells them that if they don't address even one item as requested, they agree that your statement of fact is true.  It is part of your full disclosure to them that you require a response and lack of receiving what is requested or demanded from them proves you owe them nothing.

So raise your disputes. Don't remain silent. Always be the last to respond until they respond that they are removing the item from your credit report and closing the alleged account.

If you need assistance with credit repair and want an expert on your side, contact me for an audit of your reports and consultation to go over what needs to be done for your credit and pricing plans that can get you up and running quickly.  Just a reminder that Future Fico is a non-profit so your service costs are donations that are tax deductible for you!

Contact me today!

Using the Section 609 Credit Repair Process

This is a subject that I have wanted to write about for some time now.  Many of you have heard about this method to repair your credit. Probably some of you have done it.  I'm not a big fan. I heard a lot of reports about people who have used it.  There have been some that have experienced success with this method and most of those were people who used it way back when it first came out.  I have heard of many more people that have used it and not had near the results they were expecting or were assured that they would have.  I too have used the method a couple of times for my clients but had to go back to using the methods I have used successfully for over 3 decades.

My first problem with this method is that it is only disputing with the credit bureaus. When you are going after 3rd party collections, I believe you need to protect yourself with validation demands so that you have it in place in case the collector decides to sue you.  If you have demanded validation, they cannot sue unless they have validated - a task they cannot actually and lawfully succeed at because they do not have first-hand knowledge, they have no contract, and they do not have your permission to collect information and make communications about you and the alleged account.  They have to get that authorization from you, in writing.

This method, the Section 609 method is bureau disputing only.  It is based on a good concept that requires the credit reporting agencies to prove  the verification they claim. This is a task that they NEVER do. They don't have the ability to do because they don't conduct reasonable investigations, they don't collect the documents to support the information furnished, they don't get authentic verification because verification requires sworn testimony (affidavit) accompanied with that supporting documentation. All they have is hearsay, which the courts have deemed as incompetent and inadmissible.

So, here is how it works:

You write a letter to each bureau telling them to provide the documents used to verify or that validate the following accounts.  You  are demanding that the send you the verifiable proof (copy of the original contract between the furnisher and you) that the FCRA requires them to have in your file. The word "file" is very important because they try to convince you that a "file" is the same thing as a credit report, but it is not.

Next, most templates have a table that has the furnisher name (creditor/collector) then the account number, then the dispute says "unverified account" in the final box of the table. One of the requirements under both Section 609 and 611 requires that information that is incomplete, inaccurate, or unverifiable be corrected or deleted. So, just above the table you tell them provide the proof for each account within 30 days or delete it as required by law.

The bottom of the letter tells them to remove all promotional non-account related inquiries and to suppress your information from promotional services - in other words, opting out.  After that is the signature though some variations of this credit repair process has you get each letter notarized.

So that is the method.  There are letters 2, 3 and 4.  Each letter is basically the same, but the language in each consecutive letter gets stronger. The second letter tells them that it's the 2nd written request and they claim to have verified but didn't provide any documentation. You are demanding they provide you the documentation along with the name, title, contact information with the persons who they spoke to or communicated with in their "re-investigation" in order to prove to you that an actual reasonable investigation was done and they acquired the documentation proving the account was verified.

The letter reminds them again that they are required to delete unverified accounts and if they cannot provide that documentation, then it is not verified and must be removed according to Sections 609 and 611.  It also reminds them of their civil liability (meaning you have the right to sue them) under FCRA  617 for willful negligence.

Once again the 3 column table is there with creditor/collection company name, account number and unverified account. You of course remove any accounts that have been removed from the report from the first dispute.

Round 3, letter 3. Almost the exact same as round 2 letter but it says it's the 3rd written request and then above the table you demand that they send the documentation or delete immediately. Again you make sure that you don't dispute any of the accounts that were removed from the first and second disputes.

Round 4. This letter is again slightly different.  It has a header on it that says its a Notice of Pending Litigation Seeking Relief and Monetary Damages pursuant to FCRA Sections 616 and 617. It calls them out for not investigating, not providing documents, falsely claiming the accounts are verified but never sending the proof.  It tells them the 3 previous letters they received disputing the items will be used as exhibits and evidence if they proceed to litigation as will the credit reports showing they have been disputed and claimed to verify.  

This 4th letter is definitely notarized. Also, with each round of disputes you are expected to provide copies of your ID and SS card.  I'm not big on that at all but for this process, it's recommended.  You don't want to give the CRA's any loophole for not doing their job and following the law.

So, that is the process.  I however think that you need to send validation letters to collectors and proof of claim letters to original creditors. You need to demand that they provide you with the documents used to supposedly verify the information that the furnished to the credit bureaus. You let them know that a response letter that provides a summary of the account is NOT verification, is NOT validation, is hearsay and it will be rejected because you agree with the courts that hearsay is incompetent and inadmissible.

In my follow up letters to these collectors and creditors, I call them out for not sending certified copies of original documents, sending a slew of billing statements that are NOT proof of a full accounting, not sending proof of how the account was funded and where those funds came from, proof that the account is still within the statute of limitations, proof of license and bonding to collect in the consumer's state, proof of a Power of Attorney document or written authorization showing that consumer gave their consent to collect information and make communications about the alleged account, and proof that the 3rd party collector was specifically named on any original contract showing they are entitled to collect by having an interest to protect.

I like to write bureau letters that do include Section 609, but I use many other sections of the FCRA, federal acts, code of federal regulations, case law, state statutes, UCC, and other legal ammunition.  I don't like relying on just 1 main section of the FCRA.  I do the same thing with my direct to creditor/collector letters. Demanding proof of claim or validation is important to protect yourself and including laws and the above legal ammunition, proper wording is important to see a higher rate of success in your credit repair journey.

I hope you will find this information helpful.  If you are in need of credit repair assistance and don't feel like taking it on yourself, please contact me at futurefico@gmail.com. I may be able to assist you.

My 3 R's For Disputing 3rd Party Debt Collections

Although I have several articles on this blog dealing with how to fight back against debt collectors, I still get a lot of emails and calls asking for assistance with collections whether it is how to demand validation, how to follow up, is what they got validation, etc.  I don't have time to write letters for everyone that calls and emails me for help.  I can't do that as it wouldn't be fair to my clients that hire me to help.  But, for those of you DIYers, I'll try to answer some questions here and give guidance to help you have more success.

In the credit repair world, we all used to want clients with a bunch of collections to remove.  They were always the easiest derogatory item to address and see success on. But times have changed.  Collection "accounts" are not always easy to remove anymore.  Quite the opposite. These companies have become obstinate, stubborn, still liars, but just defiant really.  They don't validate yet they refuse to remove their slander from reports as quickly as they should.  Some just flat out ignore you or refuse to remove unless you sic the big dogs on them or launch a lawsuit against them.  So I understand the frustration.  Hopefully the following information will help you get even better results.

Let's discuss my 3 R's you need to ALWAYS do with these thugs.  This means you do them with the first correspondence you get from them (Dunning Letter), every response you get from them when you have done a bureau dispute, and every response you get from validation demands and follow up letters you send to them.

1.  RESPOND

You absolutely ALWAYS need to respond to them.  If it's a 30 day initial period in which you can dispute their claim then do it within 30 days. Tell them you are exercising your right to dispute their alleged claim and are demanding validation.  If it is a response from a bureau dispute that says something to the effect of  "We received your dispute from a CRA and have investigated and our records are accurate and blah, blah, blah - we're marking it as disputed" you need to respond. 

If it is in response to a demand for validation and they do not tell you that they are removing it and closing the file, you need to respond. If it is a response to your follow up letter or your response letter, you need to respond. YOU ALWAYS NEED TO RESPOND! If it is a letter claiming that they can't determine the nature of your dispute or that it is frivolous, you need to respond.

2. REJECT

You always need to reject their claim that they validated or verified something.  You always need to reject that their records are accurate. You need to tell them that they failed to send what you requested which means they failed to validate.

Some generic letter saying they investigated and their records are accurate is not validation nor anything close to validation.  It is an unsubstantiated and reckless claim that amounts only to hearsay. They are liars. Are you going to take their word for it without any proof?  I sure wouldn't.

Sending a long detailed medical bill from the original medical facility is not validation. It is a list of services and charges from someone other than them.  That needs to be accompanied by a contract between you and the collection company with your signature and their representative's signature on it.  If they include the admitting form with your signature saying you'll be responsible, well, that was between you and the medical facility, not you and the collection company.

Even if you checked the box that they could share your information and that they might forward it to a collection company, unless the company that is trying to collect is specifically named in the original contract, you are not liable to them.  You have the right to choose who you decide to do business with. It's contract law. Without a contract showing you agreed to do business specifically with that company, they have nothing and you owe them nothing.  Reject that claim!

Sending old billing statements from a credit card company is the same thing. Its not validation. Where is the recorded assignment from the original creditor to them?  How much did they pay for your information? Notice I did not say your debt.  They did NOT purchase any debt. They purchased your information and it usually comes on an excel spreadsheet accompanied by a few of the final billing statements around the time the original account was charged off.  They are missing a big piece of the documentation though.  Where is the contract showing that you agreed to do business with them specifically?  Reject that claim!  Without a valid, bilateral contract (2 signatures, 1 from each party), they do not have a valid claim and they don't have validation.

Whatever a 3rd party collector sends you, no matter if it's a whole stack of stuff, it is NOT validation.  They MUST be able to produce a contract between their collection company and you. That is the vital document that establishes a claim and seals validation. They don't have it! REJECT, REJECT, REJECT THEIR CLAIM.

3. REFUSE

Every contact they make with you telling you that you owe something is an offer to contract with you. Refuse to contract with them.  Tell them you do not do business with collection companies and you don't pay companies that you don't owe. You're not going to start now and you refuse to contract with them.  

Why would you agree to pay someone that you don't owe and that can't prove they have any valid business agreement in place with you? I wouldn't.  Refuse their demand, refuse to contract with them. Again, everything is contract law.  In fact, when they claim they have a valid contract because they purchased the account with all rights of assignment and interest, you need to reject that immediately and throw 73 AmJur 2nd, sections 90 and 93 in their face.  This is Supreme Court case law!  

73 AmJur 2nd, Sections 90 and 93 state that they cannot substitute onto a contract unless they have an interest to protect.  That means that they have to be clearly and specifically named on the original contract to have an interest to protect.  Further, it states that they are a "Stranger to the transaction" and a "mere volunteer."  It is saying that you don't owe them.  They do not qualify for subrogation, which is substitution, under the Doctrine of Subrogation.  They are not qualified.  Don't go and agree to pay them anything. Instead, be very clear and Refuse to Contract with them.

3rd party collectors have no valid claim against you.  They have no contract with you. They cannot truly validate their claim. They have no interest to protect. They didn't buy any debt from any company, they only bought account information about you without your knowledge and without your consent and definitely without any business agreement in place requested by you.  That is the only way that they can substitute onto a contract they have no interest to protect, is by you requesting their assistance to pay off the alleged debt and you would then agree to be responsible to them. CONTRACT LAW!  It is what you have protecting you.

So, always respond, always reject their claims of owing them something and false claims of validation/verification, and always refuse to contract with them.  

If you are tired of dealing with these liars, thieves, scum sucking, extortionists called 3rd party collectors and debt buyers and are tired of the back and forth fight you have to stay on top of, I would love to assist you in the fight.  My partner and I have been at this successfully for 50 years combined.  In fact, this month I am celebrating my 30th year in the industry. I love the fight and am passionate about helping others get rid of the bad credit that is holding them back.  I get tons of emails about how my assistance has helped people get jobs, buy homes, cars, and start over.  I would love the opportunity to help you too!

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.

How To Write Bureau Dispute Letters - Part 1

You can have success with your credit repair by just disputing items with the credit bureaus.  Though that is what many credit repair companies use for their services, I personally believe to eliminate the alleged debts, you need to demand validation from both creditors and collectors in addition to disputing with credit bureaus.  When you are repairing your credit, even if you don't want to do validation letters, you absolutely must dispute with the credit bureaus.

I get quite a bit of emails from people who are not sure how to dispute with bureaus and need help with what to say, how many items can you dispute at a time, whether or not you should dispute each item individually, and a number of other questions relating to bureau disputes.  I'm going to try to answer most of them here and give you examples of how to dispute the different types of items. I'm breaking this up into 2 posts because it will be quite lengthy if I do it in just 1.

Let's start with the first part of disputing with credit bureaus.

I want to suggest to you when you start working on your credit, that you do a couple things prior to the actual account disputing. First, Opt Out from all 3 bureaus. What this means is that you do not want them selling your information for marketing purposes.  You can do it by phone or in writing or online.  

By Phone:

(888) 567-8688 - This will opt you out for 5 years.

Online:

http://www.optoutprescreen.com – you can opt out for 5 years or permanently. If you want to permanently opt out, you will need to mail in a form they provide on the site.

By mail:

You must contact each of the bureaus separately to opt out by mail.

Experian

Opt Out

PO Box 919

Allen, TX 75013

TransUnion

Name Removal Option

PO Box 505

Woodlyn, PA 19094

Equifax

Options

PO Box 740213

Atlanta, GA 30374

The next thing you should do is to look through each of your credit reports and note every name variation that is not correct, any addresses that are old and tied to something negative, and any phone numbers, employment or other personal information that is old, not correct or that you just don't need any collectors getting hold of.  Dispute each of these things with the credit bureaus.

A typical dispute for personal information is as follows:

"You are reporting names that are not me.  I have never used them, they are not aliases, they are flat out not me and don't belong on my credit report.  Remove these names please."  Then list the names that don't belong to you.

"You are reporting addresses on my credit report that I don't live at, don't belong to me, and I don't recognize. You obviously have someone else's address information on my credit report and because it's inaccurate you must remove them immediately."

Keep doing this with each personal information item that you want removed. Usually they remove them pretty quickly.  They might fight back on the addresses if they are tied to public record information, so you might need to go after them several times.  Experian is the worst for removing addresses, so just be aware of that.

At the same time you are disputing your personal information, if you have any public record information, you need to write to the court and/or county recorder and ask them if they furnish information to the credit bureaus or if they verify with them either.  You will want to tell them that you are only inquiring about what they do, and that you are not interested in the dispute process or being given some information from some court website about how long public records stay on your credit.  Just tell me does your court actually furnish or verify any information with credit reporting agencies,  You will need to include a self addressed stamped envelope with your inquiry so that they will send you the response as quickly as possible.  I actually have a letter and form that I am willing to share that is sent to the court clerk and county clerk that says what I just wrote above.  You'll need to email me for that.

So, we will get to the actual account disputing with credit bureaus on the next post,  If you have any public records that you will be attempting to remove, please email me for the court clerk and county recorder letters.  Also mention the FTC Staff Opinion Letter as that will be instrumental in removing public records as well and you'll need it when you start your disputing of those items.

My email address is up above on the right hand side, but here it is for those who can't see it on their phones.  futurefico@gmail.com

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.

Disputing 3rd Party "Debts" After The 30 Day Requirement Has Passed

Many times consumers get letters in the mail from debt collectors saying that they have some debt with this company and they need to pay the bill. Some will claim they are offering this great one time settlement offer saving you 40% or 50% off the total if paid by some date.  Really?  Should you take them up on it when I can show you how to save 100% of that ridiculous bill?

The letter, which is called a Dunning letter, is required by law to have language in it that says you have the right to dispute this debt within the next 30 days.  But what if you decided to blow them off and throw away the letter? Do you lose your right to dispute it after the 30 days has passed? Let me explain how this law actually helps you.

Here's the thing about this law. Its FDCPA §609 or 1692(g).  This law says that they must inform the consumer of their right to dispute the alleged debt and if the consumer does dispute it during the 30 day period, then the collector must stop all collection activity. Now, it doesn't say that they can't furnish information on the credit report in the first 30 days, but if they do, your best chance of making this never go on or make it come off quickly from your credit report, is to dispute in the first 30 days.  This is because furnishing information on someone's credit report is considered collection activity.

But if you don't respond in that first 30 days, the law does not say that you can't ever dispute it.  I've had collectors tell my clients that they don't have to validate because it wasn't disputed within the first 30 days.  They are absolutely correct. But, these punks are spinning the truth. You see, there is nothing in the FDCPA that REQUIRES them to validate. Nope, not at all. BUT...what it does say, is that if a consumer does dispute, they MUST cease all collection activity until they validate - if they choose to.  If they choose not to validate, then, that's fine, it means they choose to delete it. Its one or the other.

The FDCPA also says that if a consumer disputes, they have to notify the credit bureaus that the account is disputed. Here's the fun part of that. The bureau employees are so uneducated in the FDCPA they don't get that they are going to help the collection agency violate the law. They put a comment on there that the account is in dispute. I really crack up at this.

The FDCPA just told them that they have to stop collection activity if the consumer disputes. So, the collection agency notifies the bureaus that its in dispute and a dispute comment goes on the report.  What does this mean? How is that a violation of the law?  Well, when they tell the bureaus the account is in dispute, they are not supposed to be instructing them to put a dispute comment on there, they are supposed to be deleting the account from the credit report.

What they have effectively now done is continue collection activity (because its still on the report) but now they are broadcasting to anyone who sees the report that they are breaking the law. Do you understand this? Its simple. They just need to delete  it!  

So, even if you have missed that 30 day period, your right to demand validation or dispute is not revoked. You can dispute at any time. Its just that they've been better trained at removing them from credit reports when they get a dispute during the first 30 days, than they are educated about how to handle disputes they get after the first 30 days. They obviously  are not taught well that any dispute at any time, means that for a 3rd party collector, it absolutely must be removed from the credit report until they fulfill validation.

I sure hope you understand this and use it to your benefit!  Dispute away, tell them to remove it until its been validated, and if they just put a "dispute" comment on there, well, if you sue them, you just earned an easy $1000 bucks!

Feel free to comment on this or email me with questions.  I'm here to help you successfully get rid of the ugly stuff on your credit reports and get it looking pretty again!

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.

How To Stop Collectors and Creditors From Calling You

One of the most annoying things about having bad credit is getting phone calls from creditors and collectors.  You don't have to put up with it.  There is a very simple way to make the phone calls stop.  To do this, you send them a very simple letter called a "Cease and Desist" letter.

Now, you want to be careful here.  You don't want to send a "Full Cease and Desist" letter to everyone that is harassing you with those bothersome phone calls.  If you do, and you allegedly owe them a lot of money, then they will have no choice but to sue you.  So, instead, you will need to send them a "Limited Cease and Desist" letter.

The difference between the two letters is that the "Full" version stops them from contacting you at all, in any way, shape or form.  The "Limited" version stops them from calling you. The "Limited" version is what you are going to need to use most of the time.  Now, it does work, but you have to realize that if the calls keep coming, its because of one of two things. One, they don't care if they break the law, or two, they stop but they sell the alleged account to another bloodsucker and that collection company starts bugging you on the phone. 

Sometimes original creditors will claim that they have the right to contact you by phone, but they absolutely do NOT if you send them the "Limited Cease and Desist" letter.  You can tell them by phone but you will always need to follow up immediately in writing.  You can send it by fax if you have their fax number, or by email if you have that, but sending it by mail is best, and always with Certified Mail, Return Receipt.  That way, they know you are not messing around.

The only time I recommend sending the "Full Cease and Desist" letter is when the alleged account is absolutely outside of the Statute of Limitations for your state.  Even if it is a 3rd party collector that is calling, and you know if you've read much of this blog that they do not have any rights to collect anything to you, you must cover your you know what with them and not use it unless it is Time-Barred or it is so little of an alleged amount that it is not profitable for them to sue you.  Though its not profitable for them to sue you for a couple hundred dollars, they may tack on all kinds of legal fees, collection fees and court costs, to drive the price up and make it worth their while.  Also, make sure you have the documented proof that it is outside of your state's Statute of Limitations when you send them the "Full" version.

I include the "Limited" version on all letters that I write for my clients. It is the last paragraph on my demand for validation letters.  I modified it from the basic ones you find on the internet because I wanted to cover every single possible phone contact they could dream up.  Occasionally I use the "Full" version as well.  Now, I generally use this in a follow up letter to them when I know the Statute of Limitations has been reached and I know they know it, and they are still being annoying.  My "Full" version is not your typical one you find online either.  It is actually several paragraphs long because I put extra stuff on there to again attempt to force them to get their crap off the credit report.

Here are the two versions I wrote and use:

Limited Cease and Desist

I am requesting, in writing, that no telephone contact be made by your offices to my home, my cell phone, my place of employment, any friends, acquaintances, or family members. If your offices attempt telephone communication with me or people I may work for or know, it will be considered harassment and I will have no choice but to file suit. All communications with me MUST be done in writing and sent to the address noted in this letter. 

Full Cease and Desist

You are hereby notified under provisions of Public Laws 95-109 and 99-361, also known as the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, that your services are not accepted and I refuse to contract with you. You and your organization must CEASE & DESIST all attempts to collect the above alleged debt. Failure to comply with this law will result in my immediately filing a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and my state Attorney General's office. I will also pursue all criminal and civil claims against you and your company.

Furthermore, if any negative information is not removed from my credit bureau reports, or placed on my credit bureau reports by your company after receipt of this notice, I will have just cause to file suit against you and your organization, both personally and corporately, to seek any and all legal remedies available to me by law.

Please be aware that any telephone communications with me will be recorded for use against you in a court of law.  Your use of the telephone with me constitutes your agreement to my recording any and every communication from you via a telephone.

One more thing. If you can remember to do this, it can really benefit you.  Keep a journal or notepad that tracks all calls you receive. Note the company name, person who called, if it was a recorded message, the phone number, date and time of call, and the date you sent a "Cease and Desist" letter to them.

This is important because when you write to them, you will state every time they have called you.  You will remind them that you already sent a "C&D" to them on what date and you have the green certified receipt that they received and signed for it on whatever date. You may want to send them a bill charging them $1000 for every single call they made to you, another $1000 for every time they called your cell phone, $5000 every time they used a "Robodialer" and you have documented everything and have proof.  These are FTC and FDCPA violations. You could even offer them a settlement for their abusive practices to avoid being sued by you. Of course, your settlement conditions would include that they remove any trace of the alleged account from every credit report they furnished the bogus information to.

Good luck on your credit repair journey. As always, if you would like me to help you, I would love to be of assistance.  My contact information is up at the top, on the right.  If you leave a comment requesting help, please make sure you put your email in there so I can respond to you more effectively.

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.