Hmm... I need to find out myself. I don't know what is the answer to your question. I'll do some poking around and get back to you if I got an anything. You should email the people at Lending Tree as they probably could help you..

Robin,.

Its still early in the day. Perhaps you'll get some more input later on. Anyway, consider this a courtesy bump...

I think it's a great idea for those who have collections showing that truly aren't theirs..

I'm still new enough to this that I don't really have any input, but I wanted you to know someone was interested in it :).

I look forward to reading what you get put together, and I'm sure someone will be along to offer input. It's still early enough here on the West Coast that some of us are just waking up ;-)..

Super idea! I'm sitting here with a 17 month old baby girl who isn't letting me type very easily, so I'll edit down my three paragraph thought into two sentences: The Nutcase Sister Letter should include aspects of validation as well as the identity theft provisions. I would also lift some of the consumer protection language from the original Nutcase letter..

Ok, she wants to type too..

Doc..

Wow, thanx Robin..

I didn't even know about this. It will work in nicely with my "subsequent CA" letter..

Give this a little time. You'll get feedback..

:)..

Thank you, all of you!!! I was afraid to move on this without the "validation" of my fellow creditnetters. Yes PsychDoc that is exactly what I was thinking. It would have to have aspects of both the validation and the nutcase letters. The hitch is that I want it to be universal in the sense that it can be used on an original creditor and a collector collecting on behalf of the original creditor, as well as a collector who has bought the account and is collecting on it. The idea would be that by continuing to collect and report they are further damaging my credit and character and in addition to aiding and abetting the theft of my identity. I am working on it and will post a draft as soon as I can, but love more input regarding structure and content. Again, thanks guys!..

It's already been done. We use a unpaid nutcase letter for our customers and we have seen some success with it. unfortunately, I can't and won't give it to you.

1) against company policy.

2) waaayy too many people come on this board and use ANY and EVERY letter verbatim thereby diluting the effectiveness of the letter at some point..

Robin,.

Be creative! it didn't take us much time to create the "unpaid" nutcase letter. Besides it changes a little each time..

Here's a "little" more explanation on how we write the letter(s).

Http://consumers.creditnet.com/strai...822#post264822.

...

Robin,.

Are you planning on using the new nutcase letter with CA's you have already sent traditional validation letters to?.

Will you be sharing your new letter with us?.

I would love to see what you come up with..

IB..

Well I believe since I have gotten so much from this board now it's time to give a little. All input is greatly appreciated as I am sure it could use a little tweaking:.

Date.

Name of creditor/collector.

State Zip.

To whom it may concern:.

It has come to my attention that you have placed a derogatory mark on my credit bureau reports. I am hereby informing you that your listing is inaccurate and your claim is disputed. I am demanding that you delete this derogatory listing immediately and provide me with proof of such deletion at the address listed herein. Further, I am lawfully requesting for my records, a notarized statement by a person with original knowledge of the alleged debt as it was constituted and who can testify to the manner in which the alleged debt was incurred..

Please be aware, that should you choose to ignore my demand, I can only assume that you are a willing party to and that you are further aiding and abetting Identity Theft. As such, and as a last recourse to resolve this matter, I will have no other recourse but to immediately file suit against your company in an effort to bring this matter to closure..

Should you doubt that I have sufficient cause of action to do so, please see as follows:.

18 U.S.C Sec. 1028. - Fraud and related activity in connection with identification documents and information.

(a).

Whoever, in a circumstance described in subsection (c) of this section -.

(7).

Knowingly transfers or uses, without lawful authority, a means of identification of another person with the intent to commit, or to aid or abet, any unlawful activity that constitutes a violation of Federal law, or that constitutes a felony under any applicable State or local law;.

Shall be punished as provided in subsection (b) of this section..

(b).

The punishment for an offense under subsection (a) of this section is -.

(1).

Except as provided in paragraphs (3) and (4), a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than 15 years, or both, if the offense is –.

(D).

An offense under paragraph (7) of such subsection that involves the transfer or use of 1 or more means of identification if, as a result of the offense, any individual committing the offense obtains anything of value aggregating $1,000 or more during any 1-year period;.

(2).

Except as provided in paragraphs (3) and (4), a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than three years, or both, if the offense is -.

(A).

Any other production, transfer, or use of a means of identification, an identification document, or a false identification document; or.

C).

The circumstance referred to in subsection (a) of this section is that –.

(2).

The offense is an offense under subsection (a)(4) of this section; or.

(3).

Either -.

(A).

The production, transfer, possession, or use prohibited by this section is in or affects interstate or foreign commerce, including the transfer of a document by electronic means; or.

(B).

The means of identification, identification document, false identification document, or document-making implement is transported in the mail in the course of the production, transfer, possession, or use prohibited by this section..

The Fair Credit Reporting Act, section 623.

1. Responsibilities of furnishers of information to consumer reporting agencies [15 U.S.C. 1681s-2]:.

(a) Duty of furnishers of information to provide accurate information.

(1) Prohibition..

(A) Reporting information with actual knowledge of errors. A person shall not furnish any information relating to a consumer to any consumer reporting agency if the person knows or consciously avoids knowing that the information is inaccurate..

(B) Reporting information after notice and confirmation of errors. A person shall not furnish information relating to a consumer to any consumer reporting agency if.

(i) the person has been notified by the consumer, at the address specified for the person such notices, that specific information is inaccurate; and.

(ii) the information is in fact inaccurate..

(2) Duty to correct and update information. A person who.

(A) regularly and in the ordinary course of business furnishes information to one or more consumer reporting agencies about the persons transactions or experiences with any consumer; and.

(B) has furnished to a consumer reporting agency information that the person determines is not complete or accurate, shall promptly notify the consumer reporting agency of that determination and provide to the agency any corrections to that information, or any additional information, that is necessary to make the information provided by the person to the agency complete and accurate and shall not thereafter furnish to the agency any of the information that remains not complete or accurate..

B) Duties of furnishers of information upon notice of dispute..

(1) In general. After receiving notice pursuant to section 611(a)(2) [ 1681i] of a dispute with regard to the completeness or accuracy of any information provided by a person to a consumer reporting agency, the person shall.

(A) conduct an investigation with respect to the disputed information;.

(B) review all relevant information provided by the consumer reporting agency pursuant to section 611(a)(2) [ 1681i];.

(C) report the results of the investigation to the consumer reporting agency; and.

(D) if the investigation finds that the information is incomplete or inaccurate, report those results to all other consumer reporting agencies to which the person furnished the information and that compile and maintain files on consumers on a nationwide basis..

(2) Deadline. A person shall complete all investigations, reviews, and reports required under paragraph (1) regarding information provided by the person to a consumer reporting agency, before the expiration of the period under section 611(a)(1) [ 1681i] within which the consumer reporting agency is required to complete actions required by that section regarding that information..

2. According to the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 616. Civil liability for willful noncompliance [15 U.S.C. 1681n], (a) In general. Any person who willfully fails to comply with any requirement imposed under this title with respect to any consumer is liable to that consumer in an amount equal to the sum of (1) (A) any actual damages sustained by the consumer as a result of the failure or damages of not less than $100 and not more than $1,000, (2) such amount of punitive damages as the court may allow; and (3) in the case of any successful action to enforce any liability under this section, the costs of the action together with reasonable attorney's fees as determined by the court..

3. According to the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 617. Civil liability for negligent noncompliance [15 U.S.C. 1681o].

(a) In general. Any person who is negligent in failing to comply with any requirement imposed under this title with respect to any consumer is liable to that consumer in an amount equal to the sum of.

(1) any actual damages sustained by the consumer as a result of the failure;.

(2) in the case of any successful action to enforce any liability under this section, the costs of the action together with reasonable attorney's fees as determined by the court..

While I am sure that you realize that the judicial system is in place to provide resolution in cases such as this and where none can be met independently between the parties involved, the reality of the situation is that going to court is an expensive, exhaustive and time consuming endeavor for everyone involved. However, please do not mistake my intentions, if this account is not deleted forthwith I will not hesitate to immediately file suit against your company in an effort to clear my good name and restore my character. Please be further advised that there will be no further negotiations regarding this matter, should you choose not to delete your derogatory tradelines from my credit reports with the three major credit reporting agencies, I will proceed with this matter in court where you will be held to the full letter of the law as described herein..

Please note, you have (30) days from the tracked and confirmed date of receipt of this letter to delete your inaccurate and derogatory tradelines from my credit reports with the three major credit reporting agencies and to send me a copy of the Uniform Data Form you submitted to the credit reporting agencies for my records..

For the purposes of 15 USC 1692 et seq., this Notice has the same effect as a dispute to the validity of the alleged debt and a dispute to the validity of your claims. This notice is an attempt to correct your records, and any information received from you will be collected as evidence should any further action become necessary..

Thank you and I look forward to the resolution of this matter most expeditiously...

Please understand the rational for this letter. You are a victim. You are not paying a dime. In fact you will go to the end of the earth to clear your good name. You are more than willing to go to court with this (and unlike the original nutcase) this is uniquely worded to stand up in court and support your claim that you are at your wits end and are in court as a final shot at clearing your good name. Please feel free to share your thoughts...

I like it! Personally, I would keep the "identity fraud" statutes and lose the FCRA statutes. That way it makes it sound more like a case of identity fraud, and less like a "credit repair" letter...

Also, I would add more sympathy gooblety-gook(like in a goodwill letter) for an OC AS you are a victim and i'm assuming this is your first letter to them. For a CA, I might leave it as it is, maybe throw in an appropriate FDCPA statute...

I'm a Humblemarc fan, but I'll respectfully offer a dissenting opinion regarding one point. I would not include any request for sympathy in this letter. You aren't asking them for a favor out of the goodness of their hearts. You are basically suggesting that they may be in violation of several laws. Remain in control. You want them to believe that you speak with conviction enough so that you'll be a costly egal problem even if, in their estimation, you would ultimately lose the case.



Doc..

Well, shucks, Doc. I didn't know I had fans on this board. of course, i'm a fan of yours, but who here isn't (except for the obvious)?.

(this thread needed a bump!)..

LizardKing:.

Thanks. Yes this is the version of the letter that I use. I have used it about five times now and each time the outcome is the same. A letter with a fraud affadavit attached, which once signed and returned results in a deletion of the tradeline. I have not encountered a problem yet and if I thought that there would be a problem I wouldn't use it with my clients. I tested it first on one of my accounts and then started using it for clients. I hope it benefits others who may need something like this to give the extra impact needed for a deletion...

Love the letter. Should I send this before or after validation?..

If you are going to use this with a CA I would suggest going the validation route first. With an OC since they are not required to validate I normally send this as my first piece of correspondence. It has not failed me yet. Good luck!..

Robin,.

Do you sign the letter? There has been debate about letting the OC or CA knowing what your signature looks like...

Signing letters........

Anytime I sign a letter, I use the hand I normally do not use,, I do this at the bank, in front of a notary, and have the signature notorized....

I assure you, it will cause the CA/OC to think twice and scratch there damn head if they try and compare signatures..

Ive also had my wife sign my name in front of the notary, just note in the letter that it is Per: Georgiaboy, and let someone else sign.This way you dont have to worry about the butts doing a pasting job on you, and it is just as legal..

Btw robin, good letter..