Got a collection letter from Frederick Hanna and Assoc. Sent certified request for debt validation. Response was a letter that says your account was opened on XXX, last payment made XXX and client has verified XXX is true, correct and owing at this time. I intended to respond back that this did not provide, in my opinion, proof of the debt, but let time pass and now have been served with "suit on account." This was a credit card, and it says arrow finance services assignee of Washington mutual. I do not deny I had the credit card but most of money they are asking for is fees/interest added on. So could someone tell me if this is proper validation. I am going to courthouse tomorrow to respond but I'm so confused as to whether or not to try to make payment arrangements with Frederick Hannah Assoc and wondering if they will accept such a small amount that I can pay, or if this is not proper debt validation how to proceed. I would really appreciate your help. Thank you.
Forums
Proper validation should show how the balance was calculated. I would specifically confront them about this. I would file a complaint with the OCC against Wash Mut.
responding to suit on account
Thank you for giving me your thoughts. Are you saying I should call the collection agency/lawyer as well as answer the court that they did not give proper validation? If I do answer the court this way, what happens next? Is there an automatic court date or does the CA/lawyer have to come back with validation, another letter, I just don't know what results to expect from my actions. Thank you.
do not telephone.
answer the court summons with a copy of your validation request and explain that you have a right to validate how the balance was calculated