No, it is not even clear who a debt collector is, particularly under CA law. The person sending the validating notice is typically a debt collector. This just causes confusion.
CA has already made great strides as to debt buyers. This should be the rule for all collectors: that when they file, they must produce properly authenticated backing for the debt sued upon.
The solution to this problem is a mandate that account numbers and names on them not change during their life, no matter how many times transferred. This goes for credit reporting agencies as well.
There should be no option to attempt to verify the debt. Attempts should always be required and if verification is not made, the debt cannot be further transferred.
They can't be sued on in court and communications should reflect that. I have found that persons who buy old debts are not competent and rely on software and letter services to fulfill their collection obligations. Perhaps it is time to return to licensing of collectors.
rb
1
Yes, but also that upon transfer, any failure to previously verify debt per consumer request goes with the debt sold.
View this comment in the discussion thread
rb
2
No, it is not even clear who a debt collector is, particularly under CA law. The person sending the validating notice is typically a debt collector. This just causes confusion.
View this comment in the discussion thread
rb
3CA has already made great strides as to debt buyers. This should be the rule for all collectors: that when they file, they must produce properly authenticated backing for the debt sued upon.
View this comment in the discussion thread
rb
4
The solution to this problem is a mandate that account numbers and names on them not change during their life, no matter how many times transferred. This goes for credit reporting agencies as well.
View this comment in the discussion thread
rb
5
In CA they are and they should be federally too.
View this comment in the discussion thread
rb
6
There should be no option to attempt to verify the debt. Attempts should always be required and if verification is not made, the debt cannot be further transferred.
View this comment in the discussion thread
rb
7
Absolutely and it should be the kind of information this is admissible in a court of law.
View this comment in the discussion thread
rb
8
They can't be sued on in court and communications should reflect that. I have found that persons who buy old debts are not competent and rely on software and letter services to fulfill their collection obligations. Perhaps it is time to return to licensing of collectors.
View this comment in the discussion thread