Help with Weltman,Weinberg and Reis

No. Just be sure you send the letter VIA certified mail and request a receipt.

Here is the link to the letter:

http://www.fair-debt-collection.com/Disputing ... ute-letter.html

Sorry, Alf, the five day rule is for debt collectors to send a dunning letter promptly after it first contacts an alleged debtor. A collection agency in receipt of a timely dispute letter is under no obligation (outside of Texas) to ever respond, as your relative found. Validation IS required if the agency is determined to collect. Sending it lifts the suspension on all collection activity imposed by the FDCPA. Lack of validation will not kill the debt, only that one agency's plan for collecting. It does however look bad for Collector #4 when agencies #1 through #3 all chose to walk away quietly.

I think you've linked to that Weisberg & Meyers website before, and in the past I have advised against taking its advice. While less obnoxious than most consumer lawyer spammers, their reading of the FDCPA is faulty and their exhausting dispute letter templates are in full-on "Porcupine Mode". These are collection lawyers "Wondering" is facing; they make intimidation part of every balanced breakfast. Citing laws and making empty threats won't impress them. It will only tell them they have another pigeon to pluck who copied some sloppy letter off "the webs" he barely comprehends.

Collectors who can read names and numbers from an account portfolio can also read the laws they must obey. Let them hang from their own rope if they choose to ignore your rights. Let them guess what you might do to them rather than lay down a map to your own defeat. Toward the end of March I discussed a "Less Is More" dispute letter approach which is potentially far more intimidating:

https://800notes.com/forum/ta-20d8b040155b1d1 ... 822544638051187

-- further discussion from Q4 2011 --
https://800notes.com/forum/ta-188315b1c0f8c4b ... 835678714931315
https://800notes.com/Phone.aspx/1-800-719-2654#p331124200671902653

} [DFS] lowered my limit to [barely above the account balance]

Yep, that's fairly common. You forgot the motto "It Pays Discover Bank To Discover". Pushing you to high utilization was their tradeoff for your "winning" a low APR. They like other name brand card lenders are not happy until you are in constant danger of default.

} Do I call Discover [to talk settlement] ?

Try it and a DFS rep will put you on a three-way with someone from WWR, or simply rebuff you and give you a WWR phone number.

} Discover has done a charge off

Naturally. By federal law it was supposed to half a year after your default. It's nothing more than an accounting term, having no bearing on the legal status of your defaulted account. Again, DFS has given up trying to drain your savings directly. Charge-off does *NOT* mean DFS has sold your debt, and in fact it is known to clutch its distressed accounts for years. My understanding is that WWR is not a debt buyer, just a law firm with many branch offices.

} Should I [try to suddenly appear judgement proof] ? Do I show up in court and what can I do or bring?

Why, do you have a court date set? Unless you got a summons this afternoon, slow down and think. Find your local Rules of Civil Procedure if you're worried, but you have a simpler dispute process to run first, as Alf indicated. You should also conduct a risk assessment, as I advised "Remote5" back in May on the same page as your posts:

https://800notes.com/forum/ta-1dca23ad2240d24 ... 327435037790265

To be frank, Discover sends its accounts by the truckload to WWR for one reason: Make you pay or sue to collect. You're correct in predicting some local counsel will be hired, and very quietly. They can be defeated, but you have to be smart about building a defense. I'll review your other statements for places to start.

} Personally I do not give a rat's butt about my credit rating

You should give a care if WWR is reporting inaccurately. FCRA fines rack up per violation, per month. A derogatory tradeline can bar you from less obvious forms of credit, like vehicle rentals, elective medical care, and major equipment purchases. For purposes of evidence, you'll need a "real" report on paper directly from one of the three Big Bureaus. Prints from an online version won't cut it in court. Thanks to the FTC you're entitled to an annual freebie from each.

} 30 days to respond or they are taking me to court

I've already touched on overshadowing in my response to Remote5. If your dunning letter literally says or strongly implies a suit is inevitable, you got 'em on that violation. Mere printing on a law firm letterhead doesn't count.

} The amount that they [claim exceeds the original balance]

Again, naturally it does. Both your DFS contract and your state law can permit fees and interest to shoot past the moon. Claiming more than is legal violates the FDCPA, and it should be the collector's problem to prove the amount is correct. However, not having your own paperwork could hurt you. Probably you will be sent copies of DFS billing statements as part of your validation, if WWR validates at all. Then you'll need a math geek who can calculate daily compound interest.

As I've advised before in this thread -- which you may want to read end-to-end -- pay close attention to everything you are told during collection activity, and line up those events against the FDCPA and your state laws.

Here in a pair of posts is where I discussed the importance of such evidence gathering and vigilance half a year ago:
https://800notes.com/Phone.aspx/1-757-961-3544/22

Resident, thank you for all of your help.

Though I appreciated Alf's help, I didn't take his advice in regards to the "form letter."  What I had written, was almost word for word on what you had advised people to say to them. Straight and to the point.
The reason for my wanting to do this is not because they may see another pigeon, but I do not want them to think I have any knowledge on what to do to protect myself. I am with you, let them hang themselves.

I didn't go into all the details about what had happened with Discover and me, (on this forum) but the final talks when I did finally get in touch with one of their reps went nowhere. They refused to take off the late charges, or lower the interest rate to what is was BEFORE the 2.9 (even though it was still too high at 12%).
 I do have the financial means to pay off this card, but I am not going to pay that ridiculous interest they tacked on (21%) and late charges because their website was down on processing payments and not being able to get through to a rep. At this point mailing a check to them would still have been late.
When I asked about showing up in court, is once I am served not before. I want to be prepared for when that day comes, and it will. Why I suggested trying Discover one last time is because I have heard from others that Discover did a settlement for 60% of what the balance had been.

Part of the point of "Less Is More" is to keep the aggressor in the dark as to your long term strategy. You should have one plotted, but be ready to alter course. All-but-the-sink letters tend to commit you to paths you might not take.

Forty percent off a balance you think was grossly overinflated isn't a great deal. Creditors in court typically lay down for 50% against paper mill law firms. That's where you start the bidding if you have violations on the henchmen collectors. The severity of lawbreaking will help reset the needle to a lower payoff from you, or see both parties walk away unpaid. In cases with obvious headline-stealing abuse, the collector pays you just to leave it alone. In any scenario with solid FDCPA or FCRA counts you can also try for deletion of trade line and an agreement not to slap you with a 1099C. Don't forget to examine the lever of private arbitration. Pre-emptive election sets a trap making illegal the very filing of a creditor lawsuit.

I've got to butt in here.  It's a matter of conscience.

These are people with some serious problems that can only be adequately attended to with professional, reliable, unbiased advice.  These are things that cannot be reliably found on the internet.

It's true that there is a bumper crop of ideas abounding here, some of them good, some of them not so much, some geared to manipulate.

Whatever you do, before anything else, talk to an attorney.  Don't just pick up some bit of possibly contradictory and tainted advice from you-really-don't-know-who and run with it.  Check with a professional first.  You don't really know who it is that is feeding you this advice and you don't know what their motive is for this advice either.  Look out for yourself and be sure to seek competent legal advice.

Consumer.
Agreed.

However I have chosen not to speak to an attorney due to the facts I can represent in court.

One being almost 14 pages of credit reports with current and past accounts over the last 7 plus years showing not ONE account ever being past due, always being paid on time. So, what happened with this card in question? Must have been some reason. I do owe them  money, and I will pay it. I have no issue with that.
I have an issue with the tacked on late payments, interest increases for no good reason, etc. I had a 12% interest for many years, had them give me a 2.9 and because I paid online 5 minutes past their "shut off time" on the day it was due, I got raised to 21%?!  Now the amount due is considerably higher than what it had been.
Who knows, the courts may say I need to pay it all and then I will. However, I have been content enough to drag it out. We'll see what happens.

WW&R and myself went to mediation, and I told the mediator that I would be glad to pay my debt, but not with all of the added fees. I was able to settle for what I initially owed without the fees. This is your best bet. Go to court or mediation, and be honest. The mediator or judge will probably find in your favor. Good Luck!

Kelly, the "best bet" for you is not going to suit everyone. Maybe you were happy to pay face value but someone who feels wronged won't be in such a hurry to surrender. The impetus for "Wondering" was the bank's calculated maneuvers to lead the debtor closer to default. In the end the bank got what it wanted: a debtor in a vulnerable position so that the hard-won low interest rate could be jacked up to a punishing high APR. Which side of the dispute needs to "be honest" more?

"Wondering" sounds patient enough to starve out the collection opponents and wait for their legal violations to appear. That's how you build a position of strength from which to negotiate. Speaking of leverage, there's no point in relying on courthouse "mediation" when as late as 2010 the DFS contracts were naming private arbitrator JAMS as an alternate venue *and* applying them to their collector henchmen.

} ... credit reports ... showing not ONE account ever being past due

Having a polished payment record with other creditors is nice, but those lenders are not sending character witnesses to help you, and they have no bearing on your dispute with one particular lender.

This is where the pro se litigant can fall down early. You can have a valid complaint but you don't have a case until it covers something a judge or arbitrator is empowered to help fix. Many things can happen to us in consumer finance which are sneaky, rude, or unfair, yet they are legal. Creditor contracts are painstakingly crafted to permit their authors to jerk us around in nineteen different ways with impunity. To catch a lender vulnerable you need to identify a breach of contract or a TILA offense or a state law violation or something/anything which both caused you harm and breaks an established rule. Usually the lender is way ahead of you in covering its tracks, and often the time to create a dispute passes quickly.

Put more broadly, your primary mission as a litigant is not to impress a judge but to throw bricks at the opposition. Meantime you dodge and deflect what's thrown your way. You land a blow when you demonstrate what the other guy did wrong and *why* it was wrong by law. This also means aiming at a ready target. If as is typical you can't do much with the original creditor, your fight will be with its collector henchmen post-default, and by then you tend to have more weapons available.

} I will pay it. I have no issue with that.

If you had no issue with DFS you would never contemplate a strategic default. The bank clearly never wanted to negotiate with you like a valued customer but hang you by the ankles and drain your carcass the first chance it got. It's nothing personal; they do that to everyone eventually.

The moment your account is marked "charge off", you don't want the bank's service and the bank doesn't want your money .... at least not directly. It's already won back the balance through your interest payments, their securitization, and insurance. That changes considerably what paying that old balance is meant to buy for you. Defaulted debt leaves too much room to bargain not to approach its resolution as a strict business decision. There is no room for feelings of loyalty when the bank could not show you any.

} I have chosen not to speak to an attorney

That's a fair decision if you're comfortable with the adverserial nature of legal combat and you have ample time to do your homework thoroughly. You might work better alone if your available choices of counsel are unwilling or unable to help. But there is no shame in using a free consultation hour or "renting" a pro for an afternoon if you get mudstuck.

Ive been paying them for about a year now. They seem legit. And i called discover themselves to get proof they are receiving the amount. AND discover is seeing it being paid. So this is a legit collections agency. To bad discover wont send it to my credit report till its paid off >_< lol

This all started when i got a court summons in the mail from them. That's when u know an actual collections agency is real :P

Bending over for a creditor lawsuit does not prove anyone's legitimacy. Nor does your compliance invalidate the hundred-odd federal suits filed against WWR last year alone, or the reams of complaints found in online discussion groups.

Possibly you might have shot holes in their checklisted civil complaint. Fraud upon courts is not new to them. But to you everything a law firm files in court is "real", and I suspect that ignoring potentially illegal collection activity prior to that summons had a great bearing on your getting sued.

They are a legit company but it's sad to say most of the people they try and collect on are not legitimate people.  Most of the people they call are scoundrels and have been doing their best to avoid debts they haven't paid on in years.  Sometimes it takes a smack in the mouth like a judgement to open people's eyes.

It is a scofflaw company but it's sad to say most of the people they try and collect on are poorly informed of their rights. Most of the people they employ are scoundrels who have been doing their worst to collect debts they haven't validated and perjure themselves in court. Always it takes a kick in the teeth like a judgment against the collector to curb the abuses.