:evil: These bottom feeding collection companies are driving me crazy..
I'm trying to help a friend understand whether or not a collection "lawyer" can RENUMBER a charged off account
The Providian charge off was 9-03 and this collector's name is on Experian as the debtor -[11-03] It is now 4 years old
However - the acct # does NOT match the CC card #
Below this debtor acct # are 2 more PROVIDIAN collections by a different debtor with the CORRECT CC#[Transferred to another lender or claim purchased] ok - MAYBE this collector bought it from first collector - but now there are 3 collections showing. TWO for Providian and ONE for the lawsuit debtor - The $$ amounts do not match
First contact is the lawsuit. [never sent letters, calls etc.]
Complaint was filed 2-20-07 just at the statute of limitations was to expire. Complaint says the acct was charged off and it was transferred/assigned to them
However, there has NEVER been any contact by this collector to the defendant UNTIL the day after summons was served. They asked if she was going to pay! She said I will consult my attorney. They hung up.
They may not answer but we will send the debt validation letter
Question :?: Doesn't the plaintiff have burden of proof that the acct was sold/transferred - AND proof that this is the SAME CC# account??
Thannnnnks - really stressed out on this one...
These bottom feeding collection companies
are driving me crazy.. I'm trying to help a
friend understand whether or not a collection
"lawyer" can RENUMBER a charged off account
>>>They always change original Account numbers.
The Providian charge off was 9-03 and this
collector's name is on Experian as the debtor
[11-03] It is now 4 years old.
>>>A Charge-Off Date does not tell you the
Date of First Delinquency (DOFD) or the Date
of Last Payment (DOLP).
>>>What is the DOFD or the DOLP?
>>>What is the Statute of Limitations (SOL)
for your state?
However - the acct # does NOT match the CC
card #
>>>From my experience, they CAs always change
the original account numbers for their own purposes.
Below this debtor acct # are 2 more PROVIDIAN
collections by a different debtor with the CORRECT
CC#[Transferred to another lender or claim
purchased] ok - MAYBE this collector bought it from
first collector - but now there are 3 collections showing.
TWO for Providian and ONE for the lawsuit debtor -
The $$ amounts do not match.
>>>Only ONE collection agency (CA) and ONE Original
Creditor (OC) should show for an alleged account.
The CA with some ridiculous dollar amount and the
OC with a $0 Balance Due. Dispute the other two
as duplicates or triplicates with the CRAs. DV the other
CAs.
First contact is the lawsuit. [never sent letters, calls etc.]
>>>If they are on your credit report, the CA should
have sent you a Validation Notice within 5 days, in 11-2003.
It's not too late. You may still DV them. Be sure to
Answer the Complaint, as well.
Complaint was filed 2-20-07 just at the statute of limitations
was to expire. >>>How do you know for sure that the SOL
is not expired? They appear to be quite anxious!!! The debt
may very well be time-barred. Be sure to include this
as your Affirmative Defense.
Complaint says the acct was charged off and
it was transferred/assigned to them.
>>>They must prove everything they allege
in their complaint. Since they filed the lawsuit,
they should know if the account had been Transferred
or was it Assigned. Which is it? At any rate, they must
prove ownership, prove that the delinquent debt belongs
to your friend, and prove that your friend owes what they
allege.
However, there has NEVER been any contact by
this collector to the defendant UNTIL the day after
summons was served. They asked if she was going
to pay! She said I will consult my attorney. They
hung up. They may not answer but we will send the
debt validation letter >>>Yes, send the DV letter.
And be sure to file your Answer and Affirmative Defense(s)
within the prescribed time. If you fail to Answer timely,
the CA will win a Default Judgment. Yes, there is always
the possiblity that they may not appear for court, when
they see that your friend will challenge them.
Question: Doesn't the plaintiff have burden of proof that
the acct was sold/transferred - AND proof that this is the
SAME CC# account??
>>>Yes and yes. The Plaintiff has the burden of
proving its entire case against your friend. The Plaintiff
must first produce the original credit application with
your friend's signature along with statements, etc.
Thannnnnks - really stressed out on this one...
>>>Try not to be stressed out. The debt may be
time-barred and/or they may not have their documents
in order. But you will not know for sure until you DV
and file your Answer and Defenses in court. Be sure
to send a copy of your Answer and Affirmative Defenses
via by Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested to their
attorney.
Good Luck to you and your friend.
Great Points -You are good! here are details -
Thanks so very much for the detailed response!
Very heartening to hear from someone out there who knows~ We checked/double checked date of last activity [color coded] From what we can gather it says on Experian that last pmt. made in March 2003 - then after I believe just under 6 months it was charged off- Unfortunately- my friend never checked the credit report up until now.
This CA opened the current debt allegation 3 weeks after it was charged off - 11-03 and has held it for 4 years. It is obvious that 7500 X 4 years at 10% per annum is their game plan. I will charge laches for their lack of action and violation of opening the debt acct. without first notifying the debtor.
As for assigned or transferred - yes good point~ because it is very slippery. Here is the exact wording in the COMPLAINT
...... Orig creditor charged off the acct 9-30-2003 . On or about Nov. 3, 2003 orig/creditor assigned or otherwise transferred all of its right title and interest in the acct and Plaintiff is not holder of the account.
OK Grammar is one of my favorite past times. That sentence is nothing but 2 separate statements of fact connected by the word AND. i.e. Mary bought some bananas and I am now the owner of the bananas. [It excludes HOW you became owner of the bananas??? Right! LOL
I helped my friend send a scorcher of a DV - because these are lawyers and there was no excuse for them not to comply with the Federal Act. Also --Providian changed their claims terms in 2001 [big supreme court case in Alabama] which states that all card holders must agree to arbitration in lieu of court action regarding claims against them.
Perhaps being a new holder of the account the CA doesn''t have to abide by Providian?s terms?? Although I believe arbitration is more difficult to win I''m wondering if it could work against my friend if arbitration is presented as an aff/defense in the answer??? We are scheming to break the SOL by causing them to lose the action- They could not refile it because the SOL would definitely be barred.
Thanks for reading this BBL if you have any comments
whoops- correction
.........We are scheming to break the SOL by causing them A DELAY BY ASKING THE COURT FOR CONTINUANCE BECAUSE DV ANSWER NOT RECEIVED. WOULDN'T WAITING FOR DV CAUSE ACTION TO BE BARRED BY SOL ?