Cute Chick,

I have looked a little into the caselaw definition of verification per FDCPA, and unfortunately it looks like it works more against us than for us. However, if I remember correctly, the Supreme Court has not decided it (or have decided by refusing to hear it), and the issue has not reached various circuit courts either. The few that have decided the issue have ruled not in our favor. Due to this, I think the primary issue should not be geared towards deciding what verification means, but what is deemed admissible evidence to prove the verification. Find caselaw concerning evidence as inadmissible that is identical or very similar to what the CCC will say is verification of the debt, i.e. unsigned photocopies of billing statements. The problem is that some debt collectors can get signed affidavits from the alleged proper person who works in the CCC billing department and can attest that these redcords are kept properly, blah, blah, blah. Here would be the proper time to insert the applicable statute that evidence cannot be purchased (some debt collectors do pay $$$ to receive those billing staements, affidavits, etc.). If the attorney is a first party for the CCC, this will be tough if not impossible to prove. Keep in mind that some battles are not worth fighting. Settlement may be appropriate. I plan to settle mine soon. I'd love to assist, but I just do not have the time right now. Good luck.

-squirrels