Wolpoff and Abramson
[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Credit Forum Index ]
Posted by Cattleya
(24.166.76.233) on July 09, 2004 at 09:26:45:
Need some suggestions on my letter..... Some background - I have opt out of all ther CRAs, back in May W&A pull a hard on my TU. I send them a letter 2 weeks later disputing the debt, demanding validation, and asking what thier permissible purpose was - they recieved 6/7. 2 weeks after they recieved it - they place a TL on my EQ report, at that time did not have any communication from them regarding my DV. This TL was not marked 'in dispute'. 30-days after they recieved the letter, i still have no response from them. My most current EQ report shows them as listing last payment date of 6/08/2004 - clearly reaging the account. Based on my understanding of FCRA/FDCPA I got them for non-pp (no validation = no pp), continued collection after receipt of a DV, reaging, failure to mark the debt in dispute. Based on their TL this is an out of statute debt (4 years in my state) - WA list Date of first delinquency as 10/1988, though there is one more month based on infor from the OC TL (charged off 1/2001 - accout would have went delinquent 7 or 8 2000). So I don't know if I should use the SOL letter from Why Chat's site. I don't have any records of this account, all I CAN remember was that I was in no position to pay anyone in 2000 - 2001, when most of my troubles started - AND the couple of ones I WOULD forgo food for at the time were the biggies (Citi & Disc). This is the letter that i have prepared to send them in response to their lack of response - any other suggesitons would be nice: RE: Second attempt – Request for Validation and demand of permissible pupose CERTIFIED MAIL Sir/Madam: This is my second attempt at resolving this matter. You are in receipt of my letter dated June 3, 2004. In this letter I demanded proof of your permissible purpose to pull my Trans Union credit report or proof of your claim of any alleged debt – again this is not a refusal to pay, but a notice that the alleged debt is disputed. A representative you your firm signed for this letter on June 7, 2004. I have enclosed a copy of this letter to refresh your memory. As I have failed to receive from you proper validation in regard to any alleged debt that I may owe you, I can only assume that you did not have permissible purpose to pull my Trans Union credit report. Since you appear to lack permissible purpose, Wolpoff and Abramson is liable for damages of $1000 or greater. The addition of your trade line to my Equifax report is considered continued collection and is a violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) since you were notified the debt was disputed prior to listing this to my credit file. Further, you have violated FDCPA in that you have failed to mark the entry as being disputed when you reported it. Finally, it appears that you have illegally re-aged the entry on my Equifax credit report since you are suggesting a last payment date of 06/15/2004. You are required to report the SAME information as the original creditor, which you have not done. These violations make Wolpoff and Abramson liable for damages of an additional $1000 under FDCPA. As a reasonable person, I am willing settle this matter without going to court. Please remove this erroneous inquiry off my Trans Union credit report, remove your entry from my Equifax credit file, and arrange for payment of $2,000 within 30 calendar days of your receipt of this letter to the name at the address listed at the top of this page. I look forward to hearing from you to resolve this in an expedient and amicable manner.
Follow Ups:
Post a Followup
|
