Bedard Continues Analysis of Validation Information, Notes Ties to Hunstein Situation

For anyone who has read Regulation F (and we know who you are), Section 1006.34 may have taken some time to get through. For those of you who haven’t read it, Section 34 as we’ll call it deals with one letter — the validation notice, and only the validation notice. The new validation notice — whether you choose to use the CFPB’s Model Validation Notice or not — is one of the biggest changes that collectors will have to make once the rule goes into effect. It includes a lot of new wrinkles and information that collectors will have to provide to consumers. In the latest episode of “You Wanted a Rule, You Got a Rule,” John Bedard of Bedard Law Group discusses Section 1006.34(c)(2) of the rule, which addresses the information about the debt that will have to be included in validation notices.

There are nine pieces of information about the debt that will need to be part of all validation notices that are sent to consumers. They are:

  • (i) The debt collector’s name and the mailing address at which the debt collector accepts disputes and requests for original-creditor information.
  • (ii) The consumer’s name and mailing address.
  • (iii) If the debt collector is collecting a debt related to a consumer financial product or service as defined in § 1006.2(f), the name of the creditor to whom the debt was owed on the itemization date.
  • (iv) The account number, if any, associated with the debt on the itemization date, or a truncated version of that number.
  • (v) The name of the creditor to whom the debt currently is owed.
  • (vi) The itemization date.
  • (vii) The amount of the debt on the itemization date.
  • (viii) An itemization of the current amount of the debt reflecting interest, fees, payments, and credits since the itemization date. A debt collector may disclose the itemization on a separate page provided in the same communication with a validation notice, if the debt collector includes on the validation notice, where the itemization would have appeared, a statement referring to that separate page.
  • (ix) The current amount of the debt.

Perhaps this is more than just coincidence, but as the industry awaits the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals’s answer regarding a petition to rehear the Hunstein case, Bedard notes that this particular section of the rule notes that collectors can use a vendor’s mailing address in the validation notice as long as the “collector also receives and properly handles disputes and requests for original creditor information at that address.”

Check out all the episodes in the series here: You Wanted a Rule, You Got a Rule. You will also find links on that page to subscribe to the audio version of the series through Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, and Spotify. Like what you see? Be sure to reach out to John and let him know!

Check Also

California Legislature Passes AB1020

The California state Senate has followed the Assembly in passing AB1020, a bill that would …

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.