Topic: OC to CA to JDB to JDB and so on

[muddywater]

Dunning letter answered with DV sent CMRRR on OC then months later dunning from CA, send DV CMRRR, then months later sold to JDB....and another Dunning from them.................and so on.

Question, all say you have 30 days to DV or we consider it valid............. do I have to DV CMRRR every time they sell it down the road. such a pain and not very cost effective.    Thank you.

[CleaningUp]

This is a question that the courts have tended to say away from

I believe one or two federal circuits in the mid-west say that the first DV applies to all subsequent holders-in-due course.

It may be a pain, but isn't it better that you protect yourself and assure that your FDCPA rights are invoked than to leave it to speculation?

Don't shoot yourself in the foot with that argument...It's your food, after all.

[Bruno the JDB Killer]

You're in the right circuit, Muddy. You are in AZ which is the 9th.


The Ninth Circuit recently construed the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) provision[1] that requires a debt collector to send a validation-of-debt notice within five days of “the initial communication” with a consumer regarding the collection of a debt.  In Hernandez v. Williams, Zinman & Parham P.C.,[2] the Court addressed the question of whether “the initial communication” refers only to the very first communication sent to a consumer regarding the debt or to the first communication sent by each debt collector that seeks to collect on the debt.  The question has divided district courts, and the Ninth Circuit is the first federal court of appeals to provide an answer in a published opinion.[3]  In doing so, the Court held that the FDCPA requires each debt collector to send a debt validation notice containing specific disclosures within five days of that collector’s first communication with the consumer regarding the collection of the debt, regardless of whether a prior debt collector had sent a notice regarding the same debt.