WhyChat MUst read
[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Credit Forum Index ]
Posted by jp
(68.74.117.136) on February 14, 2004 at 01:06:13:
Got a letter today from the attorney general of washington - basically "Asset replied to your complaint, heres a copy for your records." Heres the letter from Asset - I now have to add to the ACA complaint to defend against the Asset replies so they have no comebacks....
This letter is in response to your letter dated XX/XX/XXXX in regards to above reference matter. Please be adised that Asset Acceptance, LLC (AALLC) is a specialty finance company that purchase various types of consumer accounts receiveables in the normal course of their business. TO date AALLC has purchased over 15 million account. AALLC is not a colelction agency as they only collect on accounts they own. Therefore, there is no requirement that they be licensed as a collection agency. (not what teh department of licensing in Washington says)
The account in question originated with XXXXXXXXXX and was acquired by AALLC in July of 2003. At that time the original creditors represented to AALLC that this was a valid account and that XXXXXXXXXXXX was the obligated party. As a debt buyer, AALLC relies on the information provided by the original creditor.
In response to the consumer's complaint I have reveiwed the history of the accoutn in question. From this reveiw I am satisfied that AALLC is in complete compliance with the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. (why would they need to be in compliance if they are not a collector??) AALLC received the debtor's unspecific dispute and validation request on XXXXXX. This was after she acknowledged the debt in conversation with AALLC representatives on XX/X and XX/X (2 phone conversations where I said if it is mine I will pay, but I need validation to show it is mine first). On XX/XX in response to the validation request, AALLC provided the debtor with validation that consisted of the computrer downloaded records received from XXXXX (creditor). On XX/XX/XXX AALLC followed up the initial validation with copies of the final statements for the account in question. How the debtor can state that AALLC has not validated this account is beyond my understanding. (what about signed contract, what about accounting to show the interest, and payments to account for differences in amounts due on all "validations") What is interesting to note about the debtors complaint, and that of numerous other internet debt avoiders, is that nowhere do they deny that they owe the moeny. They are merely attempting to use the resources of your office in an attempt to avoid payment of a debt that they know is owed. They believe that their harrassment will lead the creditors to give up and close the accounts. If that is the debtor's goal she did not succeed. AALLC has properly validated this account and they will proceed with their collection efforts. In this case I challenge the debtor to submit an affidavit, signed under penalty of perjury, that they do not owe money on the XXXXXX account in question. If they will not do that then I suggest that they quit wasting the time of your office and mine and pay the account. Of course goes on to say he hopes this has answered the complaint adequately and contcat him if he can be further assistance.
_________________
PG (EQ FAKO) scores: 543 (9/03)---> 559 (10/03) ---> 534(11/03) ---> 528 (12/03) EQ: 5 deletions, 4 corrections (addition and verification of 12 med. collections)
EX: 3 deletions, 3 corrections
TU: 11 deletions and 3 corrections
Follow Ups:
Post a Followup
|
