Author Topic: Dealing with a Collection Agency  (Read 37129 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Flyingifr

  • -DEAN EMERITUS-
  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 8485
  • Welcome to my Temper Tantrum
Dealing with a Collection Agency
« on: October 14, 2005 11:34:35 PM »
I think I found an effective way of dealing with CA's. So far it has been successful 5 out of 5 times with me.

Here's how it goes:

1. When the debt is about to be sent to the CA    send the OC a dispute letter CMRRR. Dispute the debt or part of the debt. The important thing is to have some dispute on record.

2. When you get that first call or letter from the CA    send a CMRRR letter to the CA advising them that the matter is disputed. I have used the following wording in my letters and it seems to work every time:

"You are now on notice that this debt is disputed. If you report it to a CRA and fail to include a dispute notation    I will sue. If you put yourself into the middle of the dispute    you may not be able to extract yourself from the dispute and its fallout so easily. I will vigorously enforce all my rights under both FDCPA and FCRA as well as Civil Law    Common Law and the Uniform Commercial Code."

3. In 5 out of 5 cases that I have used this tactic in    the CA dropped the matter and I never heard from them again. Keep doing this with each CA the account is turned over to and you can run out the Statute of Limitations. There is ample evidence that FICO ignores trade lines with a dispute notation    so placing the account on a CRA with the dispute notation tends to nullify any negative effect the TL seems to have.

4. Repeat the letter with every CA the OC turns the account over to - even collection attorneys. ESPECIALLY COLLECTION ATTORNEYS. The word "disputed debt" to a Collection Attorney means "Countersuit" and he will actually have to work for a living    and that this will not be a cheap    easy default judgement (those of you who have read the Flyingifr Method in Essentials already know that no creditor will ever get a cheap    easy default judgement against you).

Why does this work? Simple - the CA and the Collection Attorney have neither the ability to solve the dispute in house    nor the power to compel the OC to settle it. CA "A" does not turn its files over to CA "B"    so the more CA's you have done this with on any given debt and that you have the records to prove it with    the better it looks for you in Court if it ever gets there. "Your Honor    six CA's and teh OC were all notified of my dispute and none did anything about it...." sounds pretty bad in Court for the OC and CA's. THIS    my friends    is the soft under-belly of the collection industry. THEY know it    and now YOU know it.

I am warning them that    once they get involved    I will hold them to the letter and spirit of every law I can find that applies. FDCPA and FCRA are specific to the credit/collection industry - the Common Law applies to matters of Equity - what is fair - Civil law pertains to any damages I may sustain and the Uniform Commercial Code is the basis of my dispute with the OC    which I will impute to any Agent of the OC Under the Law of Agency (the Agent is imputed to have all the knowledge of the Principal    and the Principal shares liability for the actions of the Agent). Basically that paragraph is a warning to the CA to back off or they will be dragged into the middle of something they will regret getting dragged into the middle of.
« Last Edit: November 16, 2005 05:07:51 PM by Flyingifr »
BTW-the Flyingifr Method does work. (quoted from Hannah on Infinite Credit, September 19, 2006)

I think of a telephone as a Debt Collector's crowbar. With such a device it is possible to pry one's mouth open wide enough to allow the insertion of a foot or two.

Debtors Exams are the perfect place for us Senior Citizens to show off our recently acquired Alzheimers.

Founder of the Credit Terrorist Training Camp (Debtorboards)

Avery

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 175
  • There's 'the truth'...and THE TRUTH!
Re: Dealing with a Collection Agency
« Reply #1 on: December 14, 2005 04:25:49 PM »
Hi Flyingifr,

I was wondering if you had an update on this method? I actually did send a series of CMRRR dispute letters to an OC before it was charged off, about a year ago. Now I have an law firm CA after me and was thinking about trying this method. Did you actually send a copy of your dispute letters to the CA's or just the green return receipts (if sent certified), or did you just state the wording in a letter and leave it at that?

Has any of the CA's come back and ask you or the OC what the dispute was about, and/or to provide the dispute letters?

Thanks!
« Last Edit: December 14, 2005 04:41:59 PM by Avery »

Flyingifr

  • -DEAN EMERITUS-
  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 8485
  • Welcome to my Temper Tantrum
Re: Dealing with a Collection Agency
« Reply #2 on: December 14, 2005 05:40:16 PM »
Hi Flyingifr,

I was wondering if you had an update on this method? I actually did send a series of CMRRR dispute letters to an OC before it was charged off, about a year ago. Now I have an law firm CA after me and was thinking about trying this method. Did you actually send a copy of your dispute letters to the CA's or just the green return receipts (if sent certified), or did you just state the wording in a letter and leave it at that?

Has any of the CA's come back and ask you or the OC what the dispute was about, and/or to provide the dispute letters?

Thanks!

Just save the green card and a copy of the dispute letter. I have a letter in the Letters section on how to handle a CA and it works just as good with an attorney. Here's the scenario - a collection attorney, who makes his money on getting Default Judgments in bulk, send youa letter demanding payment. You send a letter saying you have defenses and a counterclaim against the OC and if the attorney wants a long court fight he just found it.....

I will send the CA a copy of the dispute letter if they request it - attached to the summons because my dispute letter also is a limited cease-communications and a VOD demand - so if they didn't provide VOD with the request for the dispute letter they just violated FDCOA.
BTW-the Flyingifr Method does work. (quoted from Hannah on Infinite Credit, September 19, 2006)

I think of a telephone as a Debt Collector's crowbar. With such a device it is possible to pry one's mouth open wide enough to allow the insertion of a foot or two.

Debtors Exams are the perfect place for us Senior Citizens to show off our recently acquired Alzheimers.

Founder of the Credit Terrorist Training Camp (Debtorboards)

Avery

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 175
  • There's 'the truth'...and THE TRUTH!
Re: Dealing with a Collection Agency
« Reply #3 on: December 15, 2005 06:06:32 PM »
Thanks for the info!

I would think that once an OC charges off an account, they wipe their hands clean of any dispute and that would be the end of it.  Not to mention an OC is not a CA so you really can't dispute a debt with them unless you are specifically disputing a billing charge or several charges on the account.  In those situations I wouldn't think it would be cause for them to charge off your account unless you refused to continue making payments until the matter was resolved.

Once it gets sent to a CA your dispute is with the CA now and them only.  What would happen if a CA were to remember and/or keep record of your pre-court discussion where you spoke of your dispute with the OC?  Woulc the CA be able to get you to cough up your dispute letters in court so the court can see what your argument with the OC was about?  Is there any way this could backfire?

Thanks again!

Flyingifr

  • -DEAN EMERITUS-
  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 8485
  • Welcome to my Temper Tantrum
Re: Dealing with a Collection Agency
« Reply #4 on: December 15, 2005 07:33:38 PM »
Thanks for the info!

I would think that once an OC charges off an account, they wipe their hands clean of any dispute and that would be the end of it. Not to mention an OC is not a CA so you really can't dispute a debt with them unless you are specifically disputing a billing charge or several charges on the account. In those situations I wouldn't think it would be cause for them to charge off your account unless you refused to continue making payments until the matter was resolved.

Not entirely accurate. Charge off is a bookkeping entry. It does not man the OC has given up on collecting nor does it mean they have "washed their hands of it", nor does it make any dispute you may have go away or irrelevant. Selling the account to another company (usually a JDB) is "washing their hands of you", but the dispute follows the debt. You can certainly have a dispute with an OC and a CA - in fact, any dispute with the OC becomes a dispute with the CA automatically - once you notify the CA that there is a dispute with the OC. The CA will probably dismiss the dispute by saying "The OC doesn't agree with you, as far as they are concerned, and we are concerned, there is no dispute, so pay up" (I had a CA try that on me today). That is pure nonsense - neither the OC nor the CA is the final arbiter of the dispute - a Judge is.

Quote
Once it gets sent to a CA your dispute is with the CA now and them only. What would happen if a CA were to remember and/or keep record of your pre-court discussion where you spoke of your dispute with the OC? Woulc the CA be able to get you to cough up your dispute letters in court so the court can see what your argument with the OC was about? Is there any way this could backfire?

Thanks again!

No, the CA is merely the Agent - the dispute is with the Principal - the OC and it successors (like a JDB). It is highly inlikely a CA would produce your dispute letters in coyurt because it would blow their claim out of the water. "Your Honor, the deadbeat owes us money and here are all the letters he wrote disputing the debt to prove it...."
BTW-the Flyingifr Method does work. (quoted from Hannah on Infinite Credit, September 19, 2006)

I think of a telephone as a Debt Collector's crowbar. With such a device it is possible to pry one's mouth open wide enough to allow the insertion of a foot or two.

Debtors Exams are the perfect place for us Senior Citizens to show off our recently acquired Alzheimers.

Founder of the Credit Terrorist Training Camp (Debtorboards)

genesis0127

  • Credit Repair Junkie
  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 3
Re: Dealing with a Collection Agency
« Reply #5 on: January 05, 2006 11:14:16 PM »
I think I found an effective way of dealing with CA's. So far it has been successful 5 out of 5 times with me.

Here's how it goes:

1. When the debt is about to be sent to the CA, send the OC a dispute letter CMRRR. Dispute the debt or part of the debt. The important thing is to have some dispute on record.

2. When you get that first call or letter from the CA, send a CMRRR letter to the CA advising them that the matter is disputed. I have used the following wording in my letters and it seems to work every time:

"You are now on notice that this debt is disputed. If you report it to a CRA and fail to include a dispute notation, I will sue. If you put yourself into the middle of the dispute, you may not be able to extract yourself from the dispute and its fallout so easily. I will vigorously enforce all my rights under both FDCPA and FCRA as well as Civil Law, Common Law and the Uniform Commercial Code."

3. In 5 out of 5 cases that I have used this tactic in, the CA dropped the matter and I never heard from them again. Keep doing this with each CA the account is turned over to and you can run out the Statute of Limitations. There is ample evidence that FICO ignores trade lines with a dispute notation, so placing the account on a CRA with the dispute notation tends to nullify any negative effect the TL seems to have.

4. Repeat the letter with every CA the OC turns the account over to - even collection attorneys. ESPECIALLY COLLECTION ATTORNEYS. The word "disputed debt" to a Collection Attorney means "Countersuit" and he will actually have to work for a living, and that this will not be a cheap, easy default judgement (those of you who have read the Flyingifr Method in Essentials already know that no creditor will ever get a cheap, easy default judgement against you).

Why does this work? Simple - the CA and the Collection Attorney have neither the ability to solve the dispute in house, nor the power to compel the OC to settle it. CA "A" does not turn its files over to CA "B", so the more CA's you have done this with on any given debt and that you have the records to prove it with, the better it looks for you in Court if it ever gets there. "Your Honor, six CA's and teh OC were all notified of my dispute and none did anything about it...." sounds pretty bad in Court for the OC and CA's. THIS, my friends, is the soft under-belly of the collection industry. THEY know it, and now YOU know it.

I am warning them that, once they get involved, I will hold them to the letter and spirit of every law I can find that applies. FDCPA and FCRA are specific to the credit/collection industry - the Common Law applies to matters of Equity - what is fair - Civil law pertains to any damages I may sustain and the Uniform Commercial Code is the basis of my dispute with the OC, which I will impute to any Agent of the OC Under the Law of Agency (the Agent is imputed to have all the knowledge of the Principal, and the Principal shares liability for the actions of the Agent). Basically that paragraph is a warning to the CA to back off or they will be dragged into the middle of something they will regret getting dragged into the middle of.

Flyin'..... Have question, let me give you quick preview of my problem first...

Summary:
OC Health Provider up by erroneous & untimely billing practices. OC bill was disputed as $ balance due in 4/05 & to date, with no response from OC about my dispute. CA is reporting unpaid collection amount of $123 for OC (since this is medical collection, there is no OC tradeline) & CA has repeatedly updated status reported date to reflect current date after each of my CRA disputes.

Detail:
Medical collection on all 3 credit reports for $123. Started with OC billing errors & untimely billing. Sent bill dispute to OC. Requested OC recall alleged debt from CA, as balance due should be $0, not $123. OC must have contacted CA, because CA updated all 3 CRA reports to reflect current status reported date & no changes to anything else (alleged debt still noted as $123). Sent dispute to all 3 CRAs disputing debt. Dispute was specially worded for HIPAA, stating I had no knowedge of debt & included modified procedures request asking for name & contact info, date of service, who service was provided to, what it was for, & name of person providing data to CRA & manner in which data was provided. Sent another letter to OC, stating balance due $0 because of OC billing errors & untimely billing, demanded OC rescind ALL info from CA files & that OC request CA REMOVE all info from all 3 CRA reports. No response from OC. Sent multiple disputes to all 3 CRAs who have "verified" & are in either "previously investigated", "verified remains", or "frivilous" mode on any dispute sent (meaning none of them are actually doing a real reinvestigation >:() Sent letter to OC again demanding info be completely removed from CA & CRA files-totally, completely or my next step would be filing HIPAA complaint with Office of Civil Rights (OCR). No response from OC & all 3 CRA reports had status reported date updated, again. Filed complaint with OCR, sent copy to OC. No response from OC. OCR sends letter stating they cannot accept my complaint because it is NOT violation of HIPAA policy for OC to contact CA about this alleged debt. Sent another letter to OCR requesting they reconsider my complaint, as I was contending that there was NO PERMISSIBLE BUSINESS PURPOSE for OC to send ANYTHING to CA because there was NO BALANCE DUE....NADA.... No response from OCR after 3 weeks.

Now, my question is this.

Have made every effort to NOT contact CA, as this would negate my no permissible business purpose argument. Now, since OCR won't accept my complaint, then this would mean I have exhausted my options to fight this as violation of HIPAA policy.

If this is the case, could/should I use argument in this posting (noted above in bold) & send DV to CA & in DV note SPECIFICALLY that bill is in dispute. Would there be chance OC might pull this from CA, thus getting this erroneous, disputed tradeline removed? Guess this would be what everyone calls "1-2 punch?" Also, since all 3 CRAs are NOT properly doing a reinvestigation, how could I get around this? Would I send copies of my disputes to CRAs?

Keep in mind, if I use DV with CA, then this would negate my no permissible business purpose argument. So, should I pursue this route, I would want to be sure of wording in all my correspondence.

Any thoughts? Have exhausted WhyChat HIPAA letter method & running out of options.... Have 2 other medical collections with same stupid CA-different OC, so I expect I might have same problem with them. I have paid OC on one of them & will be paying 2nd one off also (same OC) as soon as I can get money together. These are legitimate debts (result of my misunderstanding of deducibles & % paid on claims) & I do want to pay them, only I want to pay OC, not stupid, moronic CA.

Help.
Gen
« Last Edit: January 05, 2006 11:29:11 PM by genesis0127 »
"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." - Mahatma Gandhi (1869-1948)

Flyingifr

  • -DEAN EMERITUS-
  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 8485
  • Welcome to my Temper Tantrum
Re: Dealing with a Collection Agency
« Reply #6 on: January 06, 2006 01:49:58 AM »
Quote
Now, my question is this.

Have made every effort to NOT contact CA, as this would negate my no permissible business purpose argument. Now, since OCR won't accept my complaint, then this would mean I have exhausted my options to fight this as violation of HIPAA policy.

Contacting the CA does not negate any of your arguments. They claim you owe, you claim you don't. It's that simple. The OC was onnotice that th debt is disputed, I would file a suit against the CA on the basis if that alone using the Doctrine of Agency - the knowledge of the Principal (the OC) is imputed to the Agent (the CA) and the OC knew it was disputed so the CA knew it was disputed and misrepresented taht fact (on several occasions) to the CRA.

Quote
If this is the case, could/should I use argument in this posting (noted above in bold) & send DV to CA & in DV note SPECIFICALLY that bill is in dispute. Would there be chance OC might pull this from CA, thus getting this erroneous, disputed tradeline removed? Guess this would be what everyone calls "1-2 punch?" Also, since all 3 CRAs are NOT properly doing a reinvestigation, how could I get around this? Would I send copies of my disputes to CRAs?

You get around it with a summons. The DV is in Discovery and any claim of theirs is rebutted by you under the "unlean hands" doctrine - they created this problem by sloth, tardiness and incompetence and they expect you to straighten it out for them. They have a contract with your insurer that probably styates claims must be processes accurately and timely - they obviously didn't do that.

Quote
Keep in mind, if I use DV with CA, then this would negate my no permissible business purpose argument. So, should I pursue this route, I would want to be sure of wording in all my correspondence.

Any thoughts? Have exhausted WhyChat HIPAA letter method & running out of options.... Have 2 other medical collections with same stupid CA-different OC, so I expect I might have same problem with them. I have paid OC on one of them & will be paying 2nd one off also (same OC) as soon as I can get money together. These are legitimate debts (result of my misunderstanding of deducibles & % paid on claims)  & I do want to pay them, only I want to pay OC, not stupid, moronic CA.

A summons brings a lot of creditors to the ir senses - especially over a small amount like this.
BTW-the Flyingifr Method does work. (quoted from Hannah on Infinite Credit, September 19, 2006)

I think of a telephone as a Debt Collector's crowbar. With such a device it is possible to pry one's mouth open wide enough to allow the insertion of a foot or two.

Debtors Exams are the perfect place for us Senior Citizens to show off our recently acquired Alzheimers.

Founder of the Credit Terrorist Training Camp (Debtorboards)

genesis0127

  • Credit Repair Junkie
  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 3
Re: Dealing with a Collection Agency
« Reply #7 on: January 06, 2006 06:10:27 PM »
Flyin'-
Thanks for your quick response. After re-reading all the postings, it finally dawned on me that the OP may not have actually had a tradeline showing up on their credit report & that these actions were suggested to try to keep one from being placed on CR. In my case, a medical collection tradeline has already been placed in my credit file.

OK, pardon my denseness this am, but have a few more questions.

My thinking about what has happened is this (walking & typing through my thoughts again, please be patient with me...):

1) When I disputed medical bill with OC, OC contacted CA & told them I was disputing bill. CA updated all 3 CRAs with current status reported date.

2) When I sent disputes to all 3 CRAs, CRAs contacted (maybe?) CA & of course, my name & SSN were "verified" & CRAs again updated current status reported.

3) When I sent WhyChat's HIPAA letter to OC using insert that reflected no balance due because of inaccurate & untimely billing, again, OC contacted CA who again, contacted CRAs & updated current status reported date. Balance due still reflected original dollar amount.

4) When I sent CRA disputes again (at least 3 more times), CRAs are now noting as "previously investigated", "verified, no change", or doing their usual "no investigation - investigation (they just sit on it for a while then tell you it has been verified)", so I'm now at an impass with the CRAs....

Now, based on what you have said:
Quote
Contacting the CA does not negate any of your arguments. They claim you owe, you claim you don't. It's that simple. The OC was onnotice that th debt is disputed, I would file a suit against the CA on the basis if that alone using the Doctrine of Agency - the knowledge of the Principal (the OC) is imputed to the Agent (the CA) and the OC knew it was disputed so the CA knew it was disputed and misrepresented taht fact (on several occasions) to the CRA.
Quote
You get around it with a summons. The DV is in Discovery and any claim of theirs is rebutted by you under the "unlean hands" doctrine - they created this problem by sloth, tardiness and incompetence and they expect you to straighten it out for them. They have a contract with your insurer that probably styates claims must be processes accurately and timely - they obviously didn't do that.
Let me see if I understand what you are suggesting.
I should consider filing suit against CA for said reasons? At this point, I haven't sent DV to CA, so I don't fully understand "DV is in discovery". Can you clarify this for me? Does this mean I file suit & as part of Discovery, I would request validation of debt? I'm somewhat confused, so can you help me understand this?

What are your thoughts on instead of filing suit right now, try the 1-2 punch & send DV to CA, disputing alleged debt & stating something to this effect (using some of your dispute language):

"You are now on notice that this alleged debt has been disputed with Dr XXXXXXXXXXXXX since April 05. If you report it to a CRA and fail to include a dispute notation, I will sue. If you put yourself into the middle of the dispute, you may not be able to extract yourself from the dispute and its fallout so easily. I will vigorously enforce all my rights under both FDCPA and FCRA as well as Civil Law, Common Law and the Uniform Commercial Code."

Then, follow my CA DV letter with 3 CRA disputes.

Would this address this:
Quote
I am warning them that, once they get involved, I will hold them to the letter and spirit of every law I can find that applies. FDCPA and FCRA are specific to the credit/collection industry - the Common Law applies to matters of Equity - what is fair - Civil law pertains to any damages I may sustain and the Uniform Commercial Code is the basis of my dispute with the OC, which I will impute to any Agent of the OC Under the Law of Agency (the Agent is imputed to have all the knowledge of the Principal, and the Principal shares liability for the actions of the Agent). Basically that paragraph is a warning to the CA to back off or they will be dragged into the middle of something they will regret getting dragged into the middle of.

My only doubt about this is that the CA will either do nothing to TL or again, update current status reported date, & leave erroneous balance on TL. If either of these things occur, then would it be a good idea to file suit?

To be perfectly honest, I am a bit squeemish about filing a suit because I have never done this before. Guess I have a fear of the unknown. Before I would do this, I would want to be certain I had a solid paper trail that would stand up in front of a judge. Also, my finances are VERY tight right now & would limit me to small claims or district court, should I choose to file. I live in a very small, rural county in Texas, so I haven't a clue about how experienced my local judges are about consumer credit laws. From what I have been reading, Federal court would seem the best place to go for lawsuits. Thought I read somewhere that once you get a lawyer, there are some rights (don't know which) you may have to give up. These are just a few of my concerns, so maybe you can understand why I hesitate when considering lawsuits.

Again, thanks for your response, assistance, & patience in helping me understand this issue I'm dealing with.
Gen
« Last Edit: January 06, 2006 06:14:20 PM by genesis0127 »
"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." - Mahatma Gandhi (1869-1948)

Flyingifr

  • -DEAN EMERITUS-
  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 8485
  • Welcome to my Temper Tantrum
Re: Dealing with a Collection Agency
« Reply #8 on: January 06, 2006 06:32:38 PM »
Let me address the questions 1 at a time.

Quote
Let me see if I understand what you are suggesting.
I should consider filing suit against CA for said reasons? At this point, I haven't sent DV to CA, so I don't fully understand "DV is in discovery". Can you clarify this for me? Does this mean I file suit & as part of Discovery, I would request validation of debt? I'm somewhat confused, so can you help me understand this?

Simple - When you file a civil suit, after the summons is served and Answered, each side has the right to "Discover", or learn, the other's case. The CA says you owe money. Your assertion is that their client and by extension them came to being owed money by a breakdown in the contractural agreement between the OC and your insurance company. Asa  result of that contractural obligation on the part of the OC to bill properly and timely, the Insurance company disallowed their claim. They now are coming to you fior payment. It is the "unclean hands" doctrine - they didn't do what they were supposed to do to "mitigate" (or reduce) the damages, so they cannot look to you to correct their error. In the Discovery process you will be demanding the documents and records that will prove your case - copies of their agreement with your Insurance Company, copies of the billings to the Insurance Company, copies of the Insurance company's rejection reasons and copies of their attempts to correct the errors.

Quote
What are your thoughts on instead of filing suit right now, try the 1-2 punch & send DV to CA, disputing alleged debt & stating something to this effect (using some of your dispute language):

"You are now on notice that this alleged debt has been disputed with Dr XXXXXXXXXXXXX since April 05. If you report it to a CRA and fail to include a dispute notation, I will sue. If you put yourself into the middle of the dispute, you may not be able to extract yourself from the dispute and its fallout so easily. I will vigorously enforce all my rights under both FDCPA and FCRA as well as Civil Law, Common Law and the Uniform Commercial Code."

Then, follow my CA DV letter with 3 CRA disputes.

The CRA's are already calling your disputes frivolous because they have "investigated" them several times, and they keep coming back as "verified". You expect the CRA to actually investigate the merits of the bill - they don't. Their "investigation" is merely going back to the source of the TL and asking "This is what we have as your TL. Is this what your records say?" If the Creditor's records indicated that you are a cannibal and they reported it as such, and you swore you were a vegetarian, of COURSE the CRA would "verify" that you are a cannibal - you haven't done anything to have the SOURCE of the error change their files. So, the CRA will keep "verifying" erroneous information. The only way you will get a creditor to correct false information in their file is with a summons to explain it to the Judge.

Quote
My only doubt about this is that the CA will either do nothing to TL or again, update current status reported date, & leave erroneous balance on TL. If either of these things occur, then would it be a good idea to file suit?

To be perfectly honest, I am a bit squeemish about filing a suit because I have never done this before. Guess I have a fear of the unknown. Before I would do this, I would want to be certain I had a solid paper trail that would stand up in front of a judge. Also, my finances are VERY tight right now & would limit me to small claims or district court, should I choose to file. I live in a very small, rural county in Texas, so I haven't a clue about how experienced my local judges are about consumer credit laws. From what I have been reading, Federal court would seem the best place to go for lawsuits. Thought I read somewhere that once you get a lawyer, there are some rights (don't know which) you may have to give up. These are just a few of my concerns, so maybe you can understand why I hesitate when considering lawsuits.

Your paper trail will be established in iscovery. You have already indicated that you disputed the debt with the OC and the CA and neither is reporting the account in dispute - so that is an immediate FCRA violation and a FDCPA violation against the CA. There are your grounds for suit. I recommend Federal Court - small calims judges often have no familiarity with FCRA/FDCPA, no patience to learn and an attitude of "no blood, no foull" - meaning you can't show any cash damages, so you lose and they win. The good part is that they are claiming $100 or so and you will be suing EACH (the OC and the CA) for $1000 - so that alone should bring them to the bargaining table.

The object of a suit in your case isn't to get before a Judge. It's to bring teh other side to the negotiating table and get a deletion of the TL.
BTW-the Flyingifr Method does work. (quoted from Hannah on Infinite Credit, September 19, 2006)

I think of a telephone as a Debt Collector's crowbar. With such a device it is possible to pry one's mouth open wide enough to allow the insertion of a foot or two.

Debtors Exams are the perfect place for us Senior Citizens to show off our recently acquired Alzheimers.

Founder of the Credit Terrorist Training Camp (Debtorboards)

Avery

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 175
  • There's 'the truth'...and THE TRUTH!
Re: Dealing with a Collection Agency
« Reply #9 on: January 10, 2006 03:35:54 PM »
Flyingifr,

When you send a dispute to the OC before charge-off, does that dispute fall under the provisions of the Fair Credit Billing Act?

Flyingifr

  • -DEAN EMERITUS-
  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 8485
  • Welcome to my Temper Tantrum
Re: Dealing with a Collection Agency
« Reply #10 on: January 10, 2006 07:26:38 PM »
Flyingifr,

When you send a dispute to the OC before charge-off, does that dispute fall under the provisions of the Fair Credit Billing Act?

Yes, if the disputed item is disputed within 60 days of it appearing on the bill. If not, it is still a FCRA issue.
BTW-the Flyingifr Method does work. (quoted from Hannah on Infinite Credit, September 19, 2006)

I think of a telephone as a Debt Collector's crowbar. With such a device it is possible to pry one's mouth open wide enough to allow the insertion of a foot or two.

Debtors Exams are the perfect place for us Senior Citizens to show off our recently acquired Alzheimers.

Founder of the Credit Terrorist Training Camp (Debtorboards)

Avery

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 175
  • There's 'the truth'...and THE TRUTH!
Re: Dealing with a Collection Agency
« Reply #11 on: January 10, 2006 08:30:18 PM »
Flyingifr,

When you send a dispute to the OC before charge-off, does that dispute fall under the provisions of the Fair Credit Billing Act?

Yes, if the disputed item is disputed within 60 days of it appearing on the bill. If not, it is still a FCRA issue.

Thanks.  I take it then, since you are about to go into default when you send off these dispute letters, that you disputing the debt in its entirety, i.e., you are disputing every item/merchant charge, in which case some of those charges would have appeared on the bill long before 60 days.  What is your input on that?  Would the FCRA take total precedence then?

Flyingifr

  • -DEAN EMERITUS-
  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 8485
  • Welcome to my Temper Tantrum
Re: Dealing with a Collection Agency
« Reply #12 on: January 10, 2006 10:51:39 PM »
No, I let them know about the dispute as soon as I formulate it.
BTW-the Flyingifr Method does work. (quoted from Hannah on Infinite Credit, September 19, 2006)

I think of a telephone as a Debt Collector's crowbar. With such a device it is possible to pry one's mouth open wide enough to allow the insertion of a foot or two.

Debtors Exams are the perfect place for us Senior Citizens to show off our recently acquired Alzheimers.

Founder of the Credit Terrorist Training Camp (Debtorboards)

Avery

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 175
  • There's 'the truth'...and THE TRUTH!
Re: Dealing with a Collection Agency
« Reply #13 on: March 13, 2006 10:34:44 PM »
Hey Flying,

Are you still having good success with this approach? When you dispute with the OC just before charge-off, are they supposed to mark the account as disputed to the CRA's? I believe under the FCBA you are allowed to withhold payment until the dispute is settled, is that correct? If so, is that the foundation of your argument against the CA's when they attempt to collect? 

Did any of the OC's regard your disputes as frivilous?
« Last Edit: March 13, 2006 10:36:20 PM by Avery »

Flyingifr

  • -DEAN EMERITUS-
  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 8485
  • Welcome to my Temper Tantrum
Re: Dealing with a Collection Agency
« Reply #14 on: March 15, 2006 02:16:32 AM »
Still 100% success rate. I never invoke FCBA since the penalty is too light - tey can't collect the first $50. Why go that route when a good juicy FDCPA suit will get them to forget the whole thing and pay ME a grand?
BTW-the Flyingifr Method does work. (quoted from Hannah on Infinite Credit, September 19, 2006)

I think of a telephone as a Debt Collector's crowbar. With such a device it is possible to pry one's mouth open wide enough to allow the insertion of a foot or two.

Debtors Exams are the perfect place for us Senior Citizens to show off our recently acquired Alzheimers.

Founder of the Credit Terrorist Training Camp (Debtorboards)

 

credit