[JayinGR]

Ok on July 23 I received a letter from a CA L. J. Ross and Associates. This dunning letter was an attempt to collect 70.00 from me for an old medical bill which still to this day i BS.

Anyway I called them on July 25 to tell them I dispute this debt and I needed a physical address to send DV letter to. Lady informed me I owed this debt and it needed to be paid. I told her they would be receiving DV letter shortly and not to call me at home or work. Dv letter was received on August 04.

Yesterday I received a call on a number NO ONE knows as it is through Vonage..

I called back to see who it was and it was L.J. Ross...Since I was out of tapes I went to the store to but some and I called back today and here is the convo CAN ANYONE FIND VIOLATIONS?? I want to make sure I am not over looking anything...

CA: Hello this is L.J. Ross and Associates how may I direct your call.
Me: Yes I am calling because you guys called me yesterday I would like to know what its in regards to.
CA: Yes may I have your SS# please?
Me: I do not give that info out so easily what type of company is this?
Ca: This is a collection agency
Me: Ohh your a CA well I dont know of any debts I owe anyone.
Ca: Well sir may I have your SS#
Me: No but you can have my name
Ca: Ok what is it?
Me: JayinGR
Ca: Ohh ok Mr. JayinGR here we are, do you still reside on xxxxx and have a phone number of xxxx
Me: Yes I do
Ca: Well we are calling in reference to so in so doctor as you owe 70.06.
Me: I sent a request for validation which your company recieved on the 4th of August I also informed your company to NEVER call me ay home or at work.
Ca: Ohh well I see we sent you a bill out on August 07.
Me: Yes I received that and its not validation its a bill and by your own admission its a bill. So when can I expect my validation as we are still in the initial 30 days here and you have not vlaidated.
Ca: Oh well I am sorry about that but we do need to collect 70.06 from you how would you like to pay for that?
Me: I would not like to pay for that. How would you like to pay me for continued collection activity and violation of my limited C&D?
Ca: Well we have the right to call you while you owe us money
Me: Owe you money I thought you said I woed so in so doctor money?
Ca: Well yes...
Me: So who do you allege I owe money to?
Ca: L.J. Ross and associates.
Me: Well send me some vlaidation and I will look it over and I will get back to you. And I will repeat one more time DO NOT CALL ME AT HOME OR WORK
Ca:. Sir I willnot keep repeating myself we can call as much as we want to at your home and the calls will comtinue while you oew us money.
Me; But you havent validated, I mean this is a CA correct?
Ca: Yes this is sir why do you keep asking?
Me: No reason I just wanted to make sure.
Ca: Well we expect to be paid in an expedicious (sp) manner so we cna close out your file.
Me: Well send me vlaidation and if its valid I will pay it.
Ca: Sir why waste time just get out your checkbook or cc and pay over the phone
Me; Your not getting it are you. I AM NOT PAYING UNTIL I RECIEVE VALIDATION FROM YOUR COMPANY. So on that note I am ending this call and let me tell you one more time NO CALLS NONE NADDA ZILTCH MAIL ONLY
Ca: Well sir we will keep calling until we get paid.
Me: Is this something your companynormaly does harrases people eventhough your company refuses to provide validation?
CA: Sir we do this all the time and its within the law so I will note you refuse to pay.
Me: I do refuse to pay until you provide vlaidation and I wil note your blatent violations of this recorded phone call for my lawsuit I will be filing tomorrow.
Ca: Sir go right ahead thats what all you deadbeats say.
Me: Goodbye.

No Miranda, continued collection activity, violation of the C&D anymore?? BTW they do have a recording that pics up that says this call may be recorded or monitored yadda yadda..

Thanks

[hannah]

Wow, persistent little bugger, wasn't she?! Nice call, Jay. Let me read it a few more times and see what I can find.

[centex]

You lose some leverage on the telephonic miranda given that you initiated the call and many courts presume that you know who you are calling.

Until additional notice is given that the statement of 07 August is invalid for the purposes you sought, they may reasonably presume the burden has been satisfied and resume their work. Remember that the statutes only speak to the verification process. FTC letter opinions are not binding upon the Court although some have found them persuasive.

What I am curious about is why you are wasting your time dealing with a CA on a $70 medical debt. Call the provider up and deal directly with them. There are ways to get ALMOST ANY OC to agree to recall and resolve the matter that take very little time to accomplish...although you cannot have PHONE-A-PHOBIA.

Oh, and since you claimed you were going to file tomorrow, I hope you have it drafted and ready to go...otherwise, you have lost future leverage with them in this matter.

[JayinGR]

I called the OC Centex he is a crook and an overbilling crook at that...Its to long of a story to post here right now as Ellie is not being cooperative...But sufice it to say I will file suit tomorrow..I am sick of these people I finally figured out who the he!! the 800 number that has been calling the last two weeks......

Uggg I am sick of these idiots...

[centex]

Originally Posted by JayinGR

I called the OC Centex he is a crook and an overbilling crook at that...Its to long of a story to post here right now as Ellie is not being cooperative...But sufice it to say I will file suit tomorrow..I am sick of these people I finally figured out who the he!! the 800 number that has been calling the last two weeks......

Uggg I am sick of these idiots...

If he is overbilling, then involve whichever State office handles oversight of said individual.

It frustrates me to no end watching people drag shit out by going through extraneous steps that are not designed to really resolve the matter in an expeditious manner.

[JayinGR]

What agency would I go to Centex? Wait duh...Dw works in the Medical Field she should know...OMg I am a moron and do not mind admiting that in public

[centex]

Originally Posted by JayinGR

What agency would I go to Centex? Wait duh...Dw works in the Medical Field she should know...OMg I am a moron and do not mind admiting that in public

The office in question would vary by State in an issue like medical...hell, here in Texas we have no fewer than a half-dozen offices that monitor medical issues and practitioners.

[hannah]

I don't think that continued collection without validation will fly because of the short amount of time between getting the VOD and this call, however, after you stating that you requested validation and she still continued to persist several times without checking out the truth of your statement would be continued collection. You would have false and misleading representation over the "Well we have the right to call you while you owe us money" cause they don't if you requested no calls. Further, "Sir we do this all the time and its within the law so I will note you refuse to pay." which is not only false and misleading but also taking an action they cannot legally take. Also false and misleading is the fact that they say that they are the creditor which you know is false.

[centex]

Originally Posted by hannah

I don't think that continued collection without validation will fly because of the short amount of time between getting the VOD and this call, however, after you stating that you requested validation and she still continued to persist several times without checking out the truth of your statement would be continued collection. You would have false and misleading representation over the "Well we have the right to call you while you owe us money" cause they don't if you requested no calls. Further, "Sir we do this all the time and its within the law so I will note you refuse to pay." which is not only false and misleading but also taking an action they cannot legally take. Also false and misleading is the fact that they say that they are the creditor which you know is false.

The point that is lost here is that Jay initiated the communication. There would be an interpretation from the bench that implied consent was given to engage in discussions related to the collection activity. Further, the failure to reduce the issue with the statement that comprised "validation" to a written complaint, he weakens his position that much further.

Jay admits to having received what they said was mailed out. The dispute is in whether it meets a legal burden, and without seeing the statement in question, it may satisfy some courts. When I dealt with ex-roomie's medical stuff, I received faxed copies of basic billing documents that were clearly sourced from the provider. Yeah they were computer generated, but they were also sufficient to demonstrate what was needed in terms of the amount due, which in that case turned out to have been an issue of insurance coverages having been changed. A phone call later and the matter was resolved via payment and subsequent deletion.

The violation of a C&D is effectively waived when Jay called them. The first question any competent judge is going to ask Jay is "If you believed telephone to be inconvenient, why did you call them?" In the meantime, Jay is left playing with his pud because that is all he is holding at the time.

Lastly, given the nature of some of the accounting arrangements in the medical arena, it is entirely possible that the account balance was transferred to the CA in this instance.

I would almost be willing to bet that I could have this thing resolved in a span of less than a half-hour of time if this was a situation where it is a medical bill Jay was truly willing to pay...the payment would go to the OC, the third party will have closed their interest and any negative reproting goes away. It's all about style...and y'all know I be stylin'

[hannah]

Originally Posted by centex

The point that is lost here is that Jay initiated the communication. There would be an interpretation from the bench that implied consent was given to engage in discussions related to the collection activity. Further, the failure to reduce the issue with the statement that comprised "validation" to a written complaint, he weakens his position that much further.

Jay admits to having received what they said was mailed out. The dispute is in whether it meets a legal burden, and without seeing the statement in question, it may satisfy some courts. When I dealt with ex-roomie's medical stuff, I received faxed copies of basic billing documents that were clearly sourced from the provider. Yeah they were computer generated, but they were also sufficient to demonstrate what was needed in terms of the amount due, which in that case turned out to have been an issue of insurance coverages having been changed. A phone call later and the matter was resolved via payment and subsequent deletion.

The violation of a C&D is effectively waived when Jay called them. The first question any competent judge is going to ask Jay is "If you believed telephone to be inconvenient, why did you call them?" In the meantime, Jay is left playing with his pud because that is all he is holding at the time.

You are correct here, IMHO. I had forgotten he called them back. But, a judge might interpret the fact that he was returning the call and did not who he was calling back a violation on the CA's part. I know, I am stretching it, but it might fly..

[rikers1]

Originally Posted by hannah

You are correct here, IMHO. I had forgotten he called them back. But, a judge might interpret the fact that he was returning the call and did not who he was calling back a violation on the CA's part. I know, I am stretching it, but it might fly..

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe a limited C&D is enforcible. Yes you can state that it is inconvenient to call at certian times, but unless you state the hours and days I understand that they can still call.

I have never found any ruling from a court upholding the limited C&D. I believe that only a full C&D would be enforcible.

[roybean]

Remember the language of the statute; if you state that it is an inconvenience to contact me by phone anywhere or any time they are in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692c (a)(1). If they continue to call you after you've made it clear that it is an annoyance then they are in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692d (5) by engaging you in repeated phone calls. I will read back thru this, but did you record the initial validation request or only the call in which you called them back? Always use the plaint language of the statutes!!!

[Gib]

Originally Posted by JayinGR

Ca: Sir go right ahead thats what all you deadbeats say.
Me: Goodbye.

No Miranda, continued collection activity, violation of the C&D anymore?? BTW they do have a recording that pics up that says this call may be recorded or monitored yadda yadda..

Thanks

This language is definitely harassment or abuse.

[JayinGR]

I record all calls...I have mountains of tapes...

In the initial call I told the girl directly DO NOT EVER CALL ME AT HOME OR WORK FROM THIS POINT FORWARD. I told them that again today too