CA-drsBONDED

[treehugger1]

drs BONDED, a collection agency with an address in Ohio, sent me a dunning letter with respect to an alleged debt. Since they are not registered as a debt collection agency in my state, I filed a complaint with the arm of the DoJ. I just got off the phone with a "case-worker" in my state. I made it very clear that I was not seeking legal advice. As a citizen, I was merely requesting that the unregistered CA receive some notice of ceasing to do business here until the CA is registered.

I am also sending them a DV and C&D request today. In the letter, I clearly ask for evidence that they can legally do business with me as an unregistered business in my state. "I abide by all state statutes. Do you?"

I'll let the Collections Forum know where this alleged debt from CitiFin ends up; reassigned or sold.

[BigJohn]

Did you write the form letter for the attorney general? These people ar government employees who are more concerned about keeping their job instead of doing their job. On the other hand, it would be interesting to see if they will do some real action.

Why do you think drs BONDED sent you a dunning letter? Because nobody is there to stop them.

[treehugger1]

BB, my response to a CA is a perfect example of why folks should do their own due diligence in terms of their state laws and the FDCPA.

Nowhere in the FDCPA does is state the consumer must separate DV and C&D. I don't where you are getting this information. I am in the ninth circuit court and there is no ruling (that I'm aware of) that states a consumer must send separate letters related to DV and C&D. Nowhere in the laws or "decisions" relating to my federal court system (ninth circuit court) do I find any such information. I have some CA's who have not contacted me via any media, but I have others who have sent me (via US Mail,) debt verification and/or validation, but never call me on the phone per my request.

Can the original CA ignore a request for DV and then you find yourself getting dunned for the same alleged debt by a different CA? In my opinion, OF COURSE THEY CAN. I think this is especially true where the owner of the debt is still the OC. I've had plenty of DV requests ignored, only to find a new CA was dunning me. The new CA is generally not tied to the last CA. The OC merely sends the account to a new CA who sends a new dunning letter. I don;t thinkl that CA 1 sending the account back to the OC constitutes "continued collections." CA 1 just washes their hands of the entire issue.

I do find lots of info on websites that state that a C&D will lead to a CA automatically assuming ALL communication with debtor must cease. The FDCPA includes a very clear ruling related to TELEPHONE CALLS that are inconvenient. On the other hand, I don't see anything in the federal codes that suggest that C&D for telephone communications preempts any additional means a CA has to communicate with a debtor.

In terms of a first CA failing to provide DV and the debt winding up in a second or third CA's hands, I fail to see where the original CA has any obligation to provide DV unless their intent is to obtain a copy of judgment or inform you of future action related to the alleged debt.

I did not submit a "form" letter to my AG's consumer finance division. I sent an email with the original dunning letter attached. The state employees here in Oregon take their responsibilities seriously. This is especially true if you provide then with the ORS number and make it clear you are not seeking legal advice or represnetation, but you feel that it is a violation of your state rights for the CA to communicate with you.

drs did send me a dunning letter, but I woud guess that drs is used to consumers rolling over and paying up, or admittng to the debt on the phone. As mentioned, I'll inform the forum of the outcome of this scenario.

[treehugger1]