validation of credit card acct

[ldyroper]

What is the name of your state? North Dakota

I recieved a letter from an atty dated 1-30-03 about a credit card acct I Do owe from 3 years ago. I sent a debt verification letter to them 2-5-03, asking for several things, among them an agreement bearing my signature where I agreed to pay the credit card people.
I just got back a computer printout, which I dont know what it is, has my name and SS# and address on it, a bunch of figures, and abbreviations. They did not answer any of my questions, or verify this is indeed something I owe. The letter just stated "Enclosed please find an itemized copy of your account as you requested. " This is NOT what I requested.
SO, Is my next step to write them back with a copy of the first letter, stating they didnt verify anything and they dont have a leg to stand on? Could they go back and find real verification at this time? or not? What are the chances of getting off the hook with this credit card company? I dont know if the lawyer purchased my debt or not, they never answered that question. Whats the next step?

 

[Ladynred]

No, what you got was certainly NOT validation.

Now you send them a 2nd letter basically saying 'nice try but you have not validated' and give them another 30 days to provide full and proper validation - a FULL accounting of the debt, start to finish, showing all charges, payments, etc. that proves what they are alleging you owe, AND a copy of an agreement with your signature on it (but you don't tell them that's what you want). You send along a copy of your first letter and reference it. Reiterate that if they can't provide validation they must cease collection activities and remove any and all entries made by them to your credit report.

In conjunction with this 2nd letter, you should also send in your dispute to the CRA's and attach a copy of the validation demand letters - if the CA can't or won't validate, and the CRA turns around and says its verified, you have something more to work with.

 

[ldyroper]

Ok great, I will send a second letter. But, now who or what are the CRA? Is that credit reporting agency? How would they know its verified? Is the CA- Collection agency? Thats the lawyer who sent the letter- they are debt collectors I found out.
Thanks for your reply and help.

 

[Ladynred]

Right on both abbreviations

How would the credit reporting agencies (CRA's) know is verified ?? Well, they don't, initially. You send in your dispute saying that the CA has NOT validated. The CRA's must, in turn, investigate your dispute. If the CRA 'verifies' that the entry on your credit report is accurate, yet the CA has NOT provided proper validation, then you have to pound on the CRA and make them produce their investigation report on HOW they verified. In either case, the account is supposed to be marked as 'in dispute' on your credit reports. If its not, you take both the CA AND the CRA to task for yet another violation of the FCRA.

 

[ldyroper]

Sounds good, Ill get right on those letters. One more thing,regarding statue of limitations, I originally opened this account in CAlifornia. So do I go by the statue for CA? I believe its been deliquent since 2001, possibley 2000.

 

[Ladynred]

You should use the SOL for where you live now. They *could* use the SOL for CA if they sued, but that doesn't seem to be very common from all I've read.

The SOL starts with the first time the account went delinquent and it was never brought current again.. not the account opening date.