I read the Doc of the Day before I filed a complaint against PRA Group, Inc. subsidiary Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC.

On page 9, Judge Rudofsky gave a concise list of what “substantive information would be a ‘verification’ under § 1692g(a).” It included “a copy of the original contract between [the alleged debtor and creditor], as well as an affidavit stating the amount still owed.”

No credit card agreement was provided in my case. There is no affidavit from the original creditor that states the amount still owed. Eight months after I filed suit, PRA “found” a statement from Capital One, but there is no affidavit that the statement shows an accurate amount owed. In fact, the credit card company made no guarantees as to the accuracy of any account on the list of millions of accounts it sold to the debt buyer for pennies on the dollar.

I am looking for a plaintiffs’ attorney who does not want to allow Judge Rudofsky to dismantle the FDCPA and is willing to take over my case on contingency. If you are accepted to practice in the Federal District Court of Eastern Arkansas and the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, please contact me at bohemian_books@yahoo.com.

Here is the Free Doc of the Day.