Fabulous Financials

The 1-2 Punch

For your reading pleasure, here’s:

The Intro

Part I: Meet the Culprit

Part II: Let’s Get Ready to Rumble

Part III: Know Your Rights

In Part II, I shared the EX “investigation” results and the letter from RJM after receiving notice of my dispute with EX. In Part III, I discussed the statutes related to debt collection and how they can be used to your advantage. With that in mind, here are my responses letters back to both of them:

My letter to RJM

Certified Mail Return Receipt Requested #xxx

[Date]

RJM Acquisitions LLC
575 UNDERHILL BLVD STE 224
SYOSSET, NY 11791-3416

Re: Account #…xxx¹

To Whom This May Concern:

I received your letter, dated 19 October 2006. I hereby dispute your claims in their entirety and request validation pursuant to the FDCPA.

Sincerely,

Single Ma (no signature)²
Address
City, State and zip

¹Although their letter showed a complete account number and the “alleged original creditor’s” account number, I only communicate with the truncated acct number shown in my credit report. I mention no more, and no less.

²I never sign a letter when communicating with a CA. They’ve been known to lift signatures and magically place them on unintended documents. Take notice, they never sign their letters either.

My response was short and sweet. Wasn’t expecting that, huh (lol)? Like I mentioned before, ignorance of the law is a poor defense. If they are not familiar with the FDCPA, then they have a lot of homework to do while they figure out how to respond to me.

If they are smart, they will read between the lines and take the proper precautions.

If they are stupid, they’ll continue with their violations, which in my case, is fine with me. I’ve already counted three since I noticed their tradeline (TL) on my CR. I’m not in the market for major credit purchases anytime soon, but I don’t mind collecting $1,000+ before I pass GO (lol).

As previously mentioned in Part II, if a consumer disputes the claim in writing, the FDCPA requires a debt collector to cease collection activities until they validate the alleged debt. There is no time limit imposed on the debt collector to respond to my request. In fact, they don’t EVER have to respond. As long as they cease collection activities until they validate, no harm is done.

“Collection activities” mean any attempt to collect a debt. And guess what? Credit reporting IS a collection activity. Ha! Now the actual meaning of “validation” is not so simple. It isn’t really defined in the statute, therefore, it is somewhat subjective. However, any reasonable person can assume that it requires a lot more than a cookie cutter letter stating “you owe me $xx because I confirmed it in my computer system.” Show me proof of:

1) the original agreement resulting in the alleged debt
2) the validity of the amount you are attempting to collect
3) you have the legal right to collect
…and most importantly
4) *I* am the right person responsible for paying

Show me proof or get the hell on!

Which leads to My letter to EX

Certified Mail Return Receipt Requested #xxx

[Date]

Experian
NCAC
PO Box 9556
Allen TX 75013

RE: Report Number xxx³

Upon review of my credit report, I found that it contains an error. I request your investigation of the following:

RJM ACQ, collection account xxx

The above account is NOT mine. Please delete it immediately.

Thirty (30) days constitute a reasonable amount of time for investigation. Per the Fair Credit Reporting Act, I request notification that this item has been deleted, as well as an updated copy of my credit report.

Sincerely,

Single Ma (signed)
Address
City, state and zip
SS#⁴
DOB⁵

^3,4,5Most CRAs will NOT take action without this information. An incomplete request will result in a lot of wasted time/effort.

As usual, CRAs have 30 days to “investigate” + 5 days to provide results.

In summary, here’s the underlying concept of CB’s 1-2 punch, legally referred to as validation and verification.

ONE
- send debt “validation” request letter to CA in accordance with the FDCPA
- legally, CA must validate the debt OR cease all collection activities, which include credit reporting
- confirm CA received validation request via certified mail with return receipt

TWO
- send dispute letter to CRA
- CRA will notify CA of dispute and attempt to “verify” the alleged debt in accordance with the FCRA

PUNCH
- if CA can not validate, they can not legally report the alleged debt
- therefore, the negative TL should be deleted

This is not fool proof, but it forces the CA to take an action to your benefit within a legal framework.

So now you’re probably wondering if or how RJM and EX responded to my letters? Did RJM validate the debt? Did they continue violating the FDCPA? Did EX delete the negative TL?

I’ll post Part V tomorrow if I get a chance to blog. I’m taking off Wed-Fri off, but I have to prepare for my guest who’ll start arriving in the morning.

If I don’t get a chance to blog before then, I hope you all have a very Happy Thanksgiving. Please take a moment to read my thanks giving list and consider the many ways you have been blessed abundantly.

*~*~*~*~*~
Work to achieve, NOT to acquire.
And as always, BE fabulous!

~SM