Help! Need clarification on the 30-day rule with DV letter

[bluemartini]

I'm going through my mail here and somehow I overlooked a dunning letter that came to me dated July 21.

Of course I'm going straight to the post office tomorrow to send my DV but I'm nervous about cutting it close. I have had bad luck with the post service lately and what if they screw up?

I'm sending it certified mail, return receipt requested.

As long as I can prove I sent the letter within the 30 days, am I OK? What would happen if the collection agency signed for it a day or two past the 30 days?

Sorry to be hyper about it but I'm freaking out a bit. This is a local law firm contacting me on behalf of their "client" the national collections agency and this is hitting close to home.

[jumbod]

My interpretation is that it has to be received within 30 days. If it's a major concern for you why not overnight the letter. You can have fed ex require a signature the same as RRR. It's more expensive but if it buys you the peace of mind and you think it will stave off the lawsuit it seems to me the extra $10 is well worth it.

Don't be penny wise and pound foolish with the PO.

[jumbod]

The real and whole point of the FDCPA law for a DV is when a CA sends you a notice and you have no idea what it is about. Say a case of ID theft and this is the first you have heard of it. You would DV them to get more info (problem is the info they provide is worthless).

I agree that in theory that's correct. But what I have read is that the real reason you should DV is that that CA record keeping is lousy. In fact, in many cases they can't validate the debt at all because they just got some paper from the OC that it worthless.

The point of a DV is not if it's your debt. The point is does the CA have the paper work to back up that debt. If it does ever go to court, and you have a decent attorney, that attorney is going to force them to prove the debt is really yours.

So I think the hope is that by DVing you try and head them off at the pass.

Whether this theory means anything in practice you probably know better than I.

[jumbod]

BB. I am new here but I am forced to agree with some of the other posters in other threads. You willingness and viciousness in attacking people who are simply trying to learn does you no credit and turns people off to the valuable information you have to share. This isn't a war; at least not for me.

I--and I mean that--I am not mistaken about anything. I am simply repeating what I have read elsewhere. And in fact, I asked you opinion about what I had read. Your response is to launch a full scale war.

If people are misinformed it's possible to correct them in such a way that you don't give them a bear maul. The first rule of good communication is that the medium should never get in the way of the message.

You are smart with a lot of good information to share. You don't need to treat other people's inexperience as an affront to you own experience. Calm down.

[jumbod]

N

What you are talking about is when you are being sued and during the discovery phase of your trial is when you ask for copies of statements, contracts, applications etc. This is when many times the JDB or Law Firm cannot get these documents.

Now for the substance of your comment. Yes, that is what I am talking about. I agree with your definition of debt validation too.

We have 100% agreement on the legal substance.

But what I have read is that the goal of doing the DV is that it puts the CA on notice that you know what you are about. It's true that all they have to do is provide the limited information you suggest. But that's not the point. It's not the point at all. The point is that by hitting them with the paperwork you are letting them know you won't roll over. So they are on notice that if they are going to sue they had better be prepared to answer the interrogatories because they are getting one now. A rational individual would assume that if they get interrogated once there is more to follow and so have their ducks lined up in a row.

Now, it has occurred to me based upon your response that this theory I have read about is giving the CAs more credit for being rational business orientated enterprises than perhaps they are due. Perhaps the poster near the beginning of the thread is right. The decision to sue is not a rational decision at all. If the CA is going to sue it doesn't matter what you do and if they are not going to sue it doesn't matter what you do. So do whatever makes you feel better and let the chips fall where they may.

The one flaw I find in that approach is that I don't think the law presumes that CAs are the crazed madmen you present them as being. Perhaps the law is wrong in that regard.

[jumbod]

BB. Lol. If you are not a lawyer you should be. When you have the facts pound the facts, when you have the law pound the law, and when you have neither the facts nor the law pound the table. You are very good at pounding the table. You should be a lawyer.

Nowhere in any of your posts have you addressed the substance of my OP. I don't even think you read it.

If the decision to sue or to validate or to do anything else is an irrational one, there is nothing left say. If the decision is a rational one there is criteria. Except you've never listed any such criteria.

When you decide to grow up and actually be a big boy come back to this thread. I'd like a rational dicussion. Not a lot of hot air.

[treehugger1]

Okay, back to the OP. It is MY understanding that you have 30 days form the receipt of the dunning letter to respond. If such is true, and one pushes the 30 days, a certified return-receipt might be in order. Unless one is willing to sue a CA/JDB it probably makes no difference, other than to put the CA/JDB on notice that you understand "some" of your rights as a least-sophisticated consumer. Interestingly enough, I was speaking with a person who works at our local collection agency. She said they seldom receive any requests for DV or C&D. Now, I live in the Oregon Outback, but I do believe the CA handles 10's of thousands of collection accounts in a muli-county region here. She said when they do receive a DV, they exercise caution and will not proceed any farther with collections until they have a full accounting for of the debt history. This is probably not hte case with most major national CA's. But keep in mind, when JDB's buy a debt for pennies, they are working the numbers. I have always believed that a request for DV is a good request to make. JMHO

[bluemartini]

Well, let me just say thanks to everyone who is chipping in their 2 cents on this subject because it is helping me learn more.

I ended up overnighting the letter on Monday -- thanks Jumbo for that suggestion. I guess when you panic, sometimes you lose your ability to think logically, and that's kind of where I am at this week.

So checking the USPS tracking website, I see it was received and signed for at 10 a.m. this morning. My DV specifically includes verbiage that they are not to call me during daytime hours; that they can communicate with me by US postal mail.

So what happens this afternoon at 3:00??? My cell phone rings and caller ID shows it is the "law firm" (yes they're registered with my state bar, I checked) calling me. So this means they have violated the FDCPA, right???

I'm just hoping to stall for time. This is only one of many, many debts I defaulted on last year (long story). I don't have enough money saved up for a lawyer yet. I want to do a BK and I'm pretty sure I qualify based on my research. But I'm scared that this "law firm" is going to get to me before I can afford to hire an attorney. If they garnish my wages it's going to take me that much longer to save up for a lawyer.

I guess only time will tell, and in the meantime I'm going to keep scraping my pennies together.

[catleg]

I think if I was scraping pennies together I wouldn't have bothered overnighting a DV letter to them.

[bluemartini]

I guess I felt I didn't have a choice. I'm new to all this and scared. I used my grocery money. So when I run out of money before my next paycheck I'll be having powdered milk, beans and vintage lunch meat from the dollar store. It won't be the first time. But what really scares me is that it probably won't be the last time either. I have got to get this lawyer money saved up.

Thanks BB for the words to use when speaking with them on the phone.

[OhioFiler]

I guess I felt I didn't have a choice. I'm new to all this and scared. I used my grocery money. So when I run out of money before my next paycheck I'll be having powdered milk, beans and vintage lunch meat from the dollar store. It won't be the first time. But what really scares me is that it probably won't be the last time either. I have got to get this lawyer money saved up.

Thanks BB for the words to use when speaking with them on the phone.

The letter these clowns sent you had the exact effect on you they wanted. They scared you.

Get yourself educated, learn about your rights and the process and you'll be in a better position to not waste your grocery money.

DO NOT FEAR THESE MORONS!

[catleg]

I hate seeing people victimized by the legalized harassment which is perpetrated by the credit industry. Having bad credit and being in debt is such a hard subject to get help on, because of the stigma attached to it. Just stick around here for a while, there are people willing to help.

[bluemartini]

I'm learning a little more each day.
Thanks, I'll definitely be reading up more here on the boards.

[bluemartini]

The letter these clowns sent you had the exact effect on you they wanted. They scared you.

You'd better believe that! I couldn't even sleep that night!