2nd validation to collection agency

[firel7]

A have attached a copy of a second validation request I have done and would like opinions and input from the knowledgeable members here. Any and all opinions and suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

Just a little bit of background, this agncy is in reciept of my first validation letter and has sent a 2nd demand for payment referencing a phone conversation that never happened. On the bottom in bold print is the statement that this is an attempt to collect a debt. Ha, ha, ha.

A question I have is whether or not I should sign this second letter, I would sign it so that my signiture is over the printed name.

I also question whether I am showing my hand to early and I of course would like to make sure that this letter is in no way argumentative.

Just another thought, the last letter sent to me was addressed by a person and signed, should I address this letter to him specifically? Or should I leave it open ended?
Thanks to all for any input and I must say I have really enjoyed the reading here as it is quite liberating!!!

...to the individual!

[firel7]

I would really appreciate any constructive criticism in regard to the letter I have drafted. In addition it would be of tremendous help to me if people could suggest recommended reading material, either here or purchased to help me continue on my quest.

Mods, Ice or Jersee, I have since noticed that there seems to be noone that has any letters or any other info posted in the manner that I have, Is there a reason for that?

I want to try to do it all right the first time around and hopefully be posting a lengthy success story!!!!

Again any help or advice is appreciated!

[Jerseee]

firel7,

the letter looks fine. You put them on notice of the code--which is great.

However, you need to demand to examine the original application or document. It is the source document that will start the whole fraud issue. Of course they won't show it to you so its either, there is a valid debt or there is not. this is why I say "alleged" is the term to use until something is validated!

Also, you should use this finding in your letters:

“Alteration of a document without authority with the intent to defraud may constitute forgery and such alteration may consist of the insertion of matter in the document after it has been signed. Buck v Superior Court (Cal App) 41 Cal Rptr 718, subsequent op on reh 232 Cal App 2d 153, 42 Cal Rptr 527, 11 ALR3d 1064, cert den “

I use it all the time with almost anything--not just debt collectors. this can apply to any contract!!!

have fun