District Court (Cal.) Says What Validation is Required under the FDCPA

In Rodriguez v. Discovery Bank, 2012 WL 1520073 (S.D.Cal. 2012), Judge Moskowitz explained what validation is required by a debt collector in response to a consumer dispute.  

Plaintiff misunderstands Defendants’ duty with respect to verification of the debt. The Ninth Circuit has made it clear that “verification of a debt involves nothing more than the debt collector confirming in writing that the amount being demanded is what the creditor is claiming is owed.” Clark v. Capital Credit & Collection Servs., Inc., 460 F.3d 1162, 1173–74 (9th Cir.2006) (quoting Chaudhry v. Gallerizzo, 174 F.3d 394, 406 (4th Cir.1999)). In Clark, the defendant obtained information about the nature and balance of the outstanding bill from the creditor and sent the plaintiffs a copy of the itemized statement provided by the creditor. The Ninth Circuit reasoned that the defendants were entitled to rely on their client’s statements to verify the debt and did not have a duty to investigate independently the amount of the claimed debt. Id. at 1174. Defendants in this case provided Plaintiff with a copy of the governing Cardmember Agreement as well as copies of monthly statements obtained from Discover that reflect the balance of $9,421 .83. (Compl.Ex. D.) Thus, Defendants satisfied the requirement that they confirm with their client the amount being claimed. See Healey v. Trans Union LLC, 2011 WL 1900149, at *8 (W.D.Wash. May 18, 2011) (holding that the defendant debt collector satisfied its obligation to verify the debt by mailing a copy of the itemized billing statement on plaintiff’s Sprint/Embarq account,); Worch v. Wolpoff & Abramson, 477 F.Supp.2d 1015 (E.D.Mo.2007) (de-fendant satisfied requirement of verification of debt by providing the plaintiff with bill statements). Defendants’ verification was legally adequate. Defendants were not required to provide affidavits or proof that they were allowed to collect the debt on Discover’s behalf. Therefore, Defendants did not vio-late the FDCPA by attempting to collect a debt prior to providing verification as required by 15 U.S.C. § 1692g(b).