Is this validation?

[NewPage]

I had two collection agencies send me letters about my Amex bill. I wrote validation letters to both. Yesterday in the mail I got a huge, poorly-wrapped (torn open in some places) stack of duplicate Amex bills. It was hand-addressed with the return address being a PO Box, no name just the POB/city etc. I should have taken a photo before I opened it, it was in pretty bad shape. A little effort and anyone could have gotten some very private info off the statements! I saved the "wrapper", such as it was.

Anyway, that's all it was -- no letter or note or anything inside. Is *that* considered validation? I've no idea who it came from.

[ryan]

From what i understand there really is no clear government-prescribed definition of 'proper validation'. For all I know that may meet the test. In general, I've started to wonder what real benefit there is to sending DV letters anyway.

[Freddy03]

IMO there is no benefit in sending DV letters. By law all they have to tell you is orginial creditor, address and amount due. Most JDB's have this infomation.

[daytona]

While what you say is true Freddy, in practice many of these firms are so scared of FDCPA violations and the like that a DV will often slow them down..sometimes months.

[HHM]

While what you say is true Freddy, in practice many of these firms are so scared of FDCPA violations and the like that a DV will often slow them down..sometimes months.

LOL where did you get that idea. Collection agencies scared of FDCPA violation...please. It is a cost of doing business. Why do you think they violate the FDCPA so flagrantly. The reason collection agencies drop an account when a DV is sent has to do with the odds of collection (which are low), not that they are afraid of FDCPA. FDCPA is largely a toothless cat. Even if the cat had teeth, it's bite isn't that bad; without teeth, it is a mere annoyance.

In any event, Freddy is right, so long as the collection agency communicates the name of the original creditor and the amount owed, they have complied with the DV. It is an open question whether sending the statements is enough, but on the other hand, that does contain the information required to satisfy a DV (amount owed and identity of creditor). However, all this is academic. Are you actually in a position to sue? If not, the whole subject is moot.

As to your other issues, there is no "privacy" right when you owe a debt. A mail fraud violation only goes against those that "open" the mail, not those that send it.