Comments on: When Debt Collectors Violate the FDCPA

By: stef4133

stef4133 — Fri, 20 Jan 2012 00:07:25 +0000

I have just gotten a letter from a collection agency stating that they are going to transfer someone else’s consumers energy account balance of $1,973 to my account. I have never lived at that residence and the account was not even in my name as well. They stated when I called Consumers energy that they need me to provide proof that I did not live at that residence in 2009 in order for it to be disputed and possibly taken off my account etc. This cannot be legal, why would I owe someone else’s debt. I am concerned that I will have my power turned off, possible credit damage etc.. Really want to do something to stop this and saw that this may fall under the FDCPA laws and have sent a letter to see if I have a suit. I just want them to be stopped even if someone has their power off for 1 day that is absolutely unacceptable, no one should owe a debt or face any sort of penalty from this. I am glad I found your article and would really love to hear back from anyone if they can help me figure out what to do. I live in Michigan and from what I can tell they’ve been doing this for a while and nothings changed. Thank you.

By: Fiance Fed Up

Fiance Fed Up — Thu, 05 Jan 2012 20:12:02 +0000

So Wrong….
My significant other made arrangments to pay monthly on an account that a law firm is collecting on. He was making his payments faithfully. He received a letter stating that they did not have an agreement on file and if he did not contact the office, then there would be further legal action. I had him call, he explained the situation. He was told that the agreement made over the phone with their representative was not acceptable, but they were accepting his payments. After a couple of months (he still making payments) he was garnished. I sent a letter to the Better Business Bureau and a couple of days ago,he was informed by the law firm that is handling the collections, that the garnishment is being retracted. Is their actions considered a violation of FDCPA?

By: daemondust

daemondust — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:48:25 +0000

I’ve always loved the wording “This call may be recorded….” They mean “We might record this call”, but they also mean “We have no problem with you recording this call, go ahead.”

Just one of those phrases that nobody thinks about the literal meaning.

By: JCH

JCH — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 15:18:53 +0000

Good stuff…

It looks like we’re about to have a fight over what is considered a proper verification. There are several collectors in the 11th Circuit that think all they have to is send the generic “yeah, you owe it.”

By: Kyle

Kyle — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 12:30:06 +0000

@Amber Hold out a little while I think there may be something in the pipeline clarifying the differences between 1st and 3rd party collectors.

The most common violation of FDCPA is a collector contacting you at your place of employment after being informed you cannot receive personal calls. Typically shops will pay close attention to disputes and Cease and Desist’s for the very reasons pointed out in this post.

Keep in mind it is going to cost a shop a lot more the $1k to take legal action to force you to pay your debt, i.e. garnishments etc. So to some shady types it could be worth the violation if it gets them closer to collecting.

By: Damon Day

Damon Day — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 15:26:21 +0000

Sure, knowing your rights is the quickest way to make a debt collector that crosses the line, curl up and go away. They will go look for easier pickings somewhere else when they learn that they can’t pull the typical stuff on you. Plus knowing what they can and cannot do will really help consumers sleep at night if they find themselves in an unfortunate situation of being behind on their bills.

By: Michael Harr @ TodayForward

Michael Harr @ TodayForward — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 15:15:31 +0000

@Damon Day – thanks for the link and the great info! This is definitely something that could be invaluable to those dealing with collections idiots.

By: Damon Day

Damon Day — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 14:27:22 +0000

oh, sorry, I forgot the link.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephone_recording_laws

By: Damon Day

Damon Day — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 14:26:51 +0000

Here is a Wiki link listing the 12 states that require 2 party recording notification. All other states allow recording if at least one person in the conversation has knowledge of the recording. Federal law prohibits third party recording of a telephone conversation in which neither of the two parties on the telephone call have knowledge of the recording.

By: codename47

codename47 — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 01:27:13 +0000

You shouldn’t inform them you are recording the call, ever. Most states do NOT require consent/notification of a recording as long as one party (ie you) knows that the recording is being made.

If they give you the “calls may be recorded” disclaimer, that is the green light to record in states which require 2 party notification. Most states don’t require this at all, though.

Federal court allows recordings done without the other party’s knowledge. Federal laws support 1 party recording laws as well.

The other way are to send all letters via certified mail so you can prove when they got it.

Reselling the debt is a common violation, but that just allows you to collect from two collectors if they each violate.

By: Michael Harr @ TodayForward

Michael Harr @ TodayForward — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 23:58:54 +0000

@Amber – I’ll second that request…I did a post on my personal blog (WealthUncomplicated) about it a few months ago because there is a distinct difference between collectors.

When I worked at Citibank as a collector some time ago, we were required to know the FDCPA inside and out. Even within these bounds, there was a wide range of collection techniques.

As to this post, I would like to know exactly how these violations are proven. Any collector (even the most vicious) will hang up if you inform them that they are being recorded. Short of a recording (which to my knowledge is inadmissible in court unless the recording is done with the other party’s knowledge), only written records would be available or messages left on a voicemail (this would be a rare instance even for the lowest of low collectors).

If you could clarify exactly how these violations are proven I’d love to read more!

By the way, most 3rd party collectors will simply re-sell the debt to another agency rather than attempt to validate the debt after a dispute. The collections world is highly profitable in part because they can buy debt so inexpensively and if they are going to have a tough time collecting, they simply re-sell it.

Cool post though…love it when greasy collectors get lit up.

By: Amber

Amber — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 15:59:59 +0000

I think it would be very beneficial for many readers if you did a segment on the different types of collectors…There are certain debts that have variations…for example student loans. That in itself is a topic worth discussing.

By: Scott

Scott — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 12:31:53 +0000

Vive la revolution!