View Full Version : The validation demand from hell! THINK about what you're mailing!


demoncasterouter
OK, here's the whole thing aboput my 22 acct deal. I have to make a decision now, jump, or get off the diving board. Sorry this is so long.
Here’s the scenario:

9-20- checked TU and EX CR’s. Saw accounts on my EX report from CA named FCS. 12 of these same accounts were on my TU report. These were opened in 96, 97, and were supposedly not charged off until 98. They also weren’t put on my reports until 12-99.

9-25- sent validation letters for all 23 accounts.

10-11- got this back as validation for only 16 of these accounts:

DECLARATION

Please note that a separate form must be filled out for EACH SEPARATE ACCOUNT.
Please provide all of the following information and submit the appropriate forms and paperwork within 30 days from the date of your receipt of this request for validation.

Name and Address of Alleged Creditor:________________KD_Hospital_____________________________

Name on File of Alleged Debtor:
_______________________demoncasterouter_________________________________

Alleged Account #:
______________________00000000__________________________________

Address on File for Alleged Debtor:
______________________(The correct address)________________________

Amount of alleged debt: ___________________________$60__________________________________

Date that this alleged debt became payable:
_________________________6-16-97________________________________

Date of original charge off or delinquency:
_________________________1-5-98__________________________________

Was this debt assigned to debt collector or purchased? ________________________Assigned_________________________________

· Please attach a copy of the agreement with your client that grants FCS the authority to collect this alleged debt. N/A

· Please attach a copy of any signed agreement debtor has made with debt collector, or other verifiable proof that debtor has a contractual obligation to pay debt collector. N/A

· Please attach a copy of any agreement that bears the signature of debtor, wherein he/she agreed to pay creditor. N/A

· Please attach copies of all statements while this account was open. N/A

___Same lady that signed my CMRRR that works for the CA, NOT the hospital___
Authorized Signature For Creditor

_______10-04-02___________________
Date

You must return this completed form along with copies of all requested information, assignments or other transfer agreements, which would establish your right to collect this alleged debt within 30 days from the date of your receipt of this letter. Your claim cannot and WILL NOT be considered if any portion of this form is not completed and returned with copies of all requested documents. This is a request for validation made pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Please allow 30 days for processing after I receive this information back.

(Next Page)
________________________________________________________________________

1327675 Demoncasterouter, Mrs.

ACCT: 1327675 Guar: (My correct social sec#)
Demoncasterouter, Mrs. Demoncasterouter, Mr.
My old address My old address
My old City My old city
My old phone My old phone
30 F ADM/SER: 05/08/96 UR CHG: 0 GP/PEN 0
OP DISCHARGE: AR CHG: 178.00SLF 123.25 5/14/96
BD 02/25/97 LST STMT: H 07/16/96 BALANCE: 123.25
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PROCEDURE DESCRIPTION COUNT AMOUNT
1636 One to one Observation per HR 2 86.00
2873 Monitor, Fetal external 1 92.00
MC-GPPENOP GROUP PENSION OP MC ADJ 1 -26.70
PGPPEN GR. PENSIONS PAYMENT 1 -28.05
---------------------------
123.25

(End pages)

This is only an example of one of these. They only sent back validation for 16 of the accounts. The above printout had the hospitals stamp on it. But it looked like a wet stamp. The rest are similar, w/ different dates, but no contracts. Looks almost like full validation, doesn’t it? Anyway, I’ll go on:

10-01-02 disputed w/ TU and EX.

11-03-02 received disputes back. 1 was deleted from TU, leaving 12 verified. 1 was deleted from EX, leaving 22 verified.

Now, remember they validated ONLY 16 of the 22 accounts. So, basically, if this is partial validation (which that’s part of what I’m asking you, because they sent no contracts), then that’s 2 FDCPA and 2 FCRA violations for verifying w/ TU and EX after only partially validating.

If these are fully validated, then that’s still 1 FDCPA and 1 FCRA violation for verifying 6 non-validated accounts (22-16=6). But which is it?

Other 2 violations are for failure to investigate ALL of the accounts (FCRA). And failure to report the accounts as “in dispute” w/ the CRA’s (FCRA). So a total of 4 violations in all…….I think…???

The story goes on:

11-11-02 sent intent to sue based on violations to the vice president. Didn’t hear a word back.

12-02-02 complained to FTC, and BBB.

12-05-02 got a fed-exed letter from VP (I wonder why???? HAHA). The following is her response letter. The things that are in quotes, are the things that I wrote to her:

Dear Mr. Demoncasterouter,

In our continuing effort to satisfy your request for validation of some 22 unpaid balances w/ KD Hospital, I will attempt to address your issues as they have been written.

As stated in your communications, you are not refusing to pay, but you dispute the bills. To date we have not been told specifically what is in dispute. In records previously sent top you the info indicates medical services were provided to you, your wife, and children in 1996 and 1997. Most balances due are after your insurance paid. Additionally, I find no records that indicate any dispute for the last 5-6 years.

Issues as stated in your letter:

"When an alleged debtor requests debt validation, it is up to the collection agency to obtain the information directly from the original creditor, and to mail that information to the debtor."

You state…”you have merely copied what you have in your computers, placed a KD stamp upon it, and mailed it to me…”

Your statement of fact is not only inaccurate, but totally untrue. The documents mailed to you were produced by KD Hospital Staff and sent to FCS. We placed our stamp of disclosure on each page (as required by law) and mailed them to you.

"You MUST provide a copy of a signed agreement between yourself and the hospital, which proves that FCS has authorization to collect on these accounts."

I am not aware of a law that requires me to provide you a copy of our contract with KD. Although you quoted one case and several rules, I find no evidence in your correspondence to substantiate this demand. If you will provide me a copy of this law, a duplicate of our contract will be sent immediately.

"You MUST provide a contractual agreement whereby I am legally obligated to pay Financial Control Services."

You are not obligated to pay FCS.

"You have not even provided a signed contract, whereby I have agreed to pay the original creditor."

I’m sure you are aware of the recent changes in the law protecting your health information (this is where signatures are maintained). We have requested copies of signed financial responsibility statements from KDH. They are in the process of gathering these copies from Medical Records. The approximate date we have been given is December 10th. With the new laws in place, we must know if you dispute having medical care provided to you, your wife, and children by KDH as reflected in the itemized statements you received. We can only provide this information to the patient/guarantor. Your confirmation will be needed to mail you this data.

The signature on the financial responsibility statement is also the hospital’s authorization to bill your insurance…which has paid. Any personal responsibility would be defined in your policy…(i.e.) deductibles, co-pay, out-of-network charges, etc.

"Under the heading “Authorized signature for creditor”, Ms. Alfred E. Newman placed her own signature in this slot. Ms. Newman is NOT an authorized signatory for the hospital."

Please advise who you consider “Authorized”.

"Responsibilities of furnishers of information to consumer reporting agencies…duty to provide accurate information.

A. Reporting information with actual knowledge of errors. A person shall not furnish any information relating to a consumer to any reporting agency if the person knows or consciously avoids knowing that the information is inaccurate."

The information we have dates back to 1996/97 and, until now, has never been disputed. To date we do not know what you consider to be an error and what is inaccurate about the information we have.

"B. Reporting information after notice and confirmation of errors. A person shall not furnish information relating to a consumer to any consumer reporting agency if the person has been notified by the consumer that specific information is inaccurate and the information is, in fact, inaccurate."

ANY inaccurate information we have will be corrected immediately. But first we must be made aware of the error. Once again, I encourage you to notify me of the erroneous reporting.

Please rest assured that FCS and KDH work diligently to maintain accurate information. We are here to work with you in any way possible to resolve your dispute.

Sincerely,

Ms. VP.

Looks like a song and dance letter intended for the FTC or the BBB (whichever got to her first). Anyway, I’m at that time now. I have to decide now how to proceed: file suit or negotiate. I think I have a good case, but that doesn’t mean anything. Do you think a judge would think I have a good case?

This looks like I have them on 4 violations, but I wanna know from the experts: YOU GUYS!

Shylock
AND continue to negotiate. People are much more amenable to resolving things when there's a lawsuit pending.

Christine
I'd think twice about filing suit. Yes, of course you have the technicalities.

But what is this crap:

""You MUST provide a copy of a signed agreement between yourself and the hospital, which proves that FCS has authorization to collect on these accounts."

I am not aware of a law that requires me to provide you a copy of our contract with KD. Although you quoted one case and several rules, I find no evidence in your correspondence to substantiate this demand. If you will provide me a copy of this law, a duplicate of our contract will be sent immediately.

"You MUST provide a contractual agreement whereby I am legally obligated to pay Financial Control Services."

You are not obligated to pay FCS.

"You have not even provided a signed contract, whereby I have agreed to pay the original creditor.""

I totally agree with the VP, and so will many judges.

You come off like an total jerk. Who was the moron that came up with this? Thousands of people are copying this, sending it out like lemmings.

Here are my questions:

Were you billed? If yes, why didn't you pay?

I think that many judges would ask the exact same questions.

You're obviously not stupid and you know how to write. How about telling them what you ARE disputing?

Christine
Ok, after all that bitching (those idotic validation forms make me really mad!) some recommendations. A MUCH better approach would have been to sit down and think about WHY you didn't pay those bills.

A very GENERIC validation letter:

Collection - generic medical collection dispute (http://www.bayhouse.com/credit-forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1122)

Try to say something that makes SENSE. I've seen so many fraudulent medical collections.

If you weren't billed say so.

If the insurance was to pay, say so.

If they can't show that they BILLED you, why should you have a collection on your credit?

If they can't show that the insurance declined the payment, WHY should you pay?

If the SOL expired, they no longer have a valid claim, but they can report.

You can try the nuisance suit, but your results might not be favorable. If the SOL has NOT expired they can probably file countersuit for the full amount + their legal fees.

Christine
I just renamed this thread and moved it from Q & A.

Anything to keep people from sending out this validation form from hell :)

And it could have been worse, at least it's not the "defamation" letter.

demoncasterouter
Never mind. I might have done some things wrong, but I'm just trying to clean up my credit so my wife and kids can have the things they deserve, that's all. Hopefully I can find some help some place where the administration won't make a spectacle of what I've done...? Thanks for making me look like an idiot.

senator
rewrite your letter paraphrasing the case from Indiana--I can't think of its name right now but I have a copy of it in all my CRA files i work on--. Actually, I can't understand what's wrong with the validation from hell, the more difficult the better I think. The case is cited on the creditlaw forum Christine runs.

Christine
If you consider SUING, you don't want to come off like a dead beat debtor. It will NOT work in your favor.

In this particular case, the collector VP has all the ammunition necessary to defeat a suit. I have had clients who contacted me AFTER they sent those form validation requests followed by even more idiotic mean and threatening letters, the "enablement of identity theft" and "defamation" type.

Why would you ask for all kinds of documentation that they do NOT have to supply? Read the VP's letter!

Would YOU pay $200 for a collection when you owe $100?

As soon a collector makes that mistake, it's very likely that you will prevail and the collection will be deleted WITHOUT payment.

It also works the other way around. You can be the asshole and they'll win.

It all comes down to this:

Do you have a dispute or do you NOT have a dispute and you're just harassing them?

If you just want to harass them, you can send whatever you want. If you want results, THINK about what your dispute is, don't just mail off some idiotic form, use your brain.

For the longest time I didn't post ANY sample letters, I know that people use their brains as little as possible. Because these awful forms are all over the net, I finally posted some GENERIC letters.

I tried to emphasize that you MUST modify the dispute according to YOUR situation.

The purpose of this forum is NOT to show dead beat debtors how to continue not paying their bills while at the same time enjoy a great credit rating.

Demoncasterouter, I just looked at your profile:

"Biography: Disciple & follower of Jesus Christ"

You complain because I said what I think about your situation and that stupid form and especially your response with all those totally unreasonable demands. I moved and renamed your thread because I think it's important to WARN people before they make your mistakes.

Don't you want to HELP other people?

I'm definitely NOT a practicing Christian, and it's been about 30 years since I read the bible. However, as I recall, Jesus lived his life HELPING people and GIVING, not taking.

I also really don't understand why you feel that hospitals, doctors and nurses should donate their time and resources to you.

Shouldn't it be the other way around?

" but I'm just trying to clean up my credit so my wife and kids can have the things they deserve, that's all."

At the expense of people who worked for you?

Isn't that like stealing?

Christine
Senator wrote:

" Actually, I can't understand what's wrong with the validation from hell, the more difficult the better I think."

Look at the VP's response. Difficult? It made it so EASY for them to turn the tables.

"The case is cited on the creditlaw forum Christine runs."

Forget the cases. Do you have ANY idea how many judges, districts and courts there are?

No lawyer is going to take this case on contingency, so the only reasonable alternative is small claims. Nobody is Perry Mason in small claims. They present the VP's letter, apparently Demoncasterouter has NO legitimate dispute, and case is dismissed.

Of course they MIGHT settle just to not have to go to court, but I know about at least 15 small claims suits where collectors went through extreme expenses and trouble to prove their point, even when they were WRONG. And sometimes they won.

I've talked to numerous collection execs and attorneys - they WILL delete when it looks like you have a good case and "jury appeal." But they won't roll over for a technicality, especially not if the debt is clearly valid.

Demoncasterouter may have a case over the verification of the accounts that were NOT validated and verified - but I don't see that anywhere in the correspondence.