by Marquisse » Thu Jan 27, 2011 11:25:42 AM
I guess not. I asked for verification because I never did business with the original creditor, but I also didn't want to be harassed and threatened while I researched the claim, so that's why I insisted on written correspondence. I was willing to explore the claim, but I needed more information. I guess their preferred MO is to harass and threaten and not provide the backup reasonably requested.
They could never claim that I was unresponsive/uncooperative or MIA, as I have a file on this matter complete with dates of calls, registered letters, proof of delivery, etc. I'm probably more organized and legally minded than they profess themselves to be. If they dealt with people in a respectful and professional manner, this "account" would've been resolved a long time ago.
Now I've got the advantage, and they will be hearing from me. Given that this is a case of fraud that I really do not wish to prosecute because of family ties (I am 99.99% sure of who it is, but the details of what was purchased has never been revealed to me so I can't check to confirm), I would much rather settle and deal with getting that money back from that person either through family pressure or small claims court. I'm not thinking of that person, I'm thinking of the two kids and the father of her children who will suffer if there were criminal charges.
Now that I am in a position to do so with no SOL in place, I have to say that their refusal to provide adequate documentation to satisfy their claim is what helped my case.