Debt validation

[DYLAN150]

I was just wondering when requesting debt validation, has anybody actually receive the original credit card application and all the billing statements from the creditor as proof. What happen when you sent them a request for this and they don't reply?

[HHM]

Here we go again...do a search on this forum for Debt Validation....

Under the FDCPA, There are ONLY 2 pieces of information a collection agency is required to give you to validate the date.
1. Name of original creditor.
2. Amount owed.
And they don't even need to send documents, all they need to do is write a letter saying the original creditor is "x" and you owe "$y", abracadabra, the debt is validated.

That is it. You can ask for anything you want...but the collection agency is only required to provide you with those two pieces of info...once they do that, the debt is validated.

Keep in mind, the validation process is merely a collection stall tactic. Violations of the validation process occur when continued collection attempts are made once the validation request is received. When you send a DV, the collection agency has 30 days to respond and during that 30 days, cannot continue collection contact. So rarely are violations of a DV process related to the info provided, because again, there are only 2 bits of info that must be provided...the violations, if they occur are violations of the 30 day collection hold.

DV's should be sent, but there is this odd myth out there that DV's actually mean something or accomplish anything, they usually don't.

The common confusion (perpetrated by all sorts of websites and misinformation on debt avoidance) is that validation = proof. It doesn't. Validation under FDCPA doesn't require the collection agency to PROVE to you the debt is owed or even that they have the right to collect it. (write your congressman).

[frogger]

What HHM said.

[sealpup]

I sent one to First Source Advantage (I believe the OC was Chase). After more than 60 days of them receiving it, they sent me a letter stating the enclosed paper was my validation. The info on the paper looked like it had been pulled from my credit report- it said it was the original application. It had an employer on it that I have NEVER worked for (but one of the credit bureau's has listed as my employer), my SSN, address, full name, etc. and way overstated my monthly income- like 10x over!! No where on it did it have a date, the OC name, the amount of the debt or anything like that. It was very generic. My question is, since it was over the 30 days, does that work to my advantage? I was going to send them a letter stating all the above, but I'm going to be filing in the next month or so, so I figured it didn't really matter. I sent another DV to Richard Beaudreau and Assoc. (OC Citi, I think), and 90+ days later have never received anything. I actually wish I would have done this more in the beginning after I had defaulted on all the credit cards- just b/c it would have bought me more time.

HHM- from what you have described, DV sounds like a joke! So really any person, company, CA, etc could hypthetically send you a letter stating you owe x amount to y company, and they have validated the debt? Even if the debt is completely bogus and it was never yours to begin with? How does that work when they file a claim in your BK- do they have to provide more proof than this?

[frogger]

DV sounds like a joke!

It pretty much is.

So really any person, company, CA, etc could hypthetically send you a letter stating you owe x amount to y company, and they have validated the debt?

That's pretty much the way it is.

Even if the debt is completely bogus and it was never yours to begin with?

Debt verification is not a court of law. There is no standard of proof required for debt verification.

How does that work when they file a claim in your BK- do they have to provide more proof than this?

Supporting documents are required

That's just the way it is.

[kornellred]

The only time debt validation is relevant is when a creditor accuses you of owing a debt which you do not actually owe. Then, and only then, is the creditor obliged to furnish proof that you actually owe the debt. If you actually do not owe the debt, the creditor will not be able to prove that you do. Creditors do not waste their time with such foolishness. Like HHM said - debtors can demand proof that they owe the debt but that will only buy you a couple of extra weeks to try and avoid the truth.
There is a long-term stall tactic out there where certain entities will continually demand that your creditors provide proof that the money they loaned you was actually on hand in the bank when you accepted the check. The Federal Reserve Act allows banks to lend far more money than they have in physical reserve legally, so there is no question that when you become indebted, you are indebted in real dollars, not the "fiat" money that was loaned to you. Stay away from that scam - it will not work.

[frogger]

The only time debt validation is relevant is when a creditor accuses you of owing a debt which you do not actually owe. Then, and only then, is the creditor obliged to furnish proof that you actually owe the debt. If you actually do not owe the debt, the creditor will not be able to prove that you do. Creditors do not waste their time with such foolishness. Like HHM said - debtors can demand proof that they owe the debt but that will only buy you a couple of extra weeks to try and avoid the truth.

No, debt validation is pretty much not relevant at any time. All it takes to "verify" a debt is a name and account balance. The only time that a creditor is "obliged" to furnish proof that you owe the debt will be in a court of law.

Mix-ups happen all the time in collections and while creditors normally do not intentionally waste their time with such foolishness, such foolishness can happen because of input errors, bad addresses, invalid ssn and the like.