Documentation vs. Escalation in Debt Collection
Consumers often encounter aggressive debt validation letters online that demand contracts, signatures, chain of ownership, and threaten regulatory action. These letters are commonly associated with attorney-driven or advisor-led strategies.
ProofOfDebt takes a different approach by default.
Two Different Approaches
Documentation-First Approach
ProofOfDebt default
This approach focuses on requesting information, documenting correspondence, and maintaining a clean timeline of events.
It avoids accusations, legal threats, or demands beyond what is necessary to establish a record. This approach is appropriate for most consumers, especially early in the collection process or when ownership is unclear.
Escalation-Based Approach
Advisor-led
Some attorneys and advisors intentionally use aggressive validation demands to apply pressure or prepare for litigation or regulatory complaints.
These approaches assume legal knowledge, follow-through, and a willingness to escalate disputes. They are not required under federal law and are not appropriate for every situation.
Why ProofOfDebt Starts Neutral
ProofOfDebt is designed for documentation, not confrontation.
Starting with neutral correspondence helps preserve clarity, avoid unnecessary escalation, and create a clean record that can support later decisions if escalation becomes appropriate.
Important Disclaimer
ProofOfDebt does not prevent escalation. It simply does not assume it.
Users remain free to pursue legal advice, attorney representation, or regulatory complaints outside of this tool.
Ready to get started?
Create your first case and generate documentation.