I keep getting calls from Portfolio Recovery who has a charge off that was charged off 6 1/2 + years ago. It's about to fall off my credit report, so there isn't any reason that I would want to talk to these idiots. Unfortunately, I stupidly had put my cell phone number on something (I think when I moved, I used it to update my phone # on a credit card) and these scumbags have it in their system. They call every 3-4 weeks, and when I answer, I tell them that they called a cell phone, and hang up. Is there any legal statute I can quote to them to make them permanently remove my cell # from their systems? Is there any kind of C&D you can use for a well past SOL debt?
Why can't you use the standard C&D letter? or even the full C&D since its out of SOL, Once you send it and they call agian wouldnt that be a violation? That may give you leverage to delete through CRA
Dear Portfolio. It is inconvenient for your company to call me at any time. Secondly... Unfortunately, for Portfolio, and collectman; Portfolio is violating the FDCPA every time they call the cell phone #, since the consumer pays for the calls... Even better, are any of the messages automated? Any automated calls to the cell phone are in violation of the TCPA. Collectman, if you disagree with those last two sentences, you need to dust off your subscription to Collector Magazine, or take two minutes to go to ACA's web site to read their compliance office's articles on those issues.
PRA doesn't use automated messages, if you want to whine about getting called on the cell phone sue them and see how far into court it gets you, and I dont mean the agency offering to settle.
collectman... The compliance department of ACA doesn't whine, so if the ACA compliance department explicitly puts into wring that their industry members calling a cell phone subjects them to liability under 807(5), then that should be enough to convince you, and anyone else in your industry... HINT: ACA is not OUR association, it's yours... They're on YOUR side, and even they say that calling a cell phone is an 807(5) violation. Need I point you to the ACA article which is still proudly pointed to by collectors as justifying the "Yep, you owe it, now pay up, we don't have to provide you with anything else" "Chaudhry" validation responses. Unfortunately, ACA grossly neglected the most important parts of the remainder of the FTC's definition of validation, and where it must come from "â?¦ intended to assist the consumer when a debt collector inadvertently contacts the wrong consumer at the start of his collection efforts." commentary (Dec. 13, 1998). "Because one of the principal purposes of this Section is to help consumers who have been misidentified by the debt collector or who dispute the amount of the debt, it is important that the verification of the identity of the consumer and the amount of the debt be obtained directly from the creditor. Mere itemization of what the debt collector already has does not accomplish this purpose. As stated above, the statute requires the debt collector, not the creditor, to mail the verification to the consumer." Wollman (March 10, 1993); and has chosen to claim that based on the abbreviated FTC definition from the commentary, and its misinterpretation of Chaudhry v. Gallerizzo, 174 F.3d 394, 406 (4th Cir. 1999), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 891 (1999); gives CAs the misinformation that just printing from their own screen matches the standards of validation. The extraneous pieces of information in Chaudhry were (a) lawyer-client confidentiality bound documentation (b) invoices for an appraisal which would be under the agreement the responsibility of the consumer to pay, but which had not yet been performed. Gee, with the exception of the form letters which demand the kitchen sink, neither of those applies to 99.44% of the validation requests. However, demanding the contract and statements goes directly to proving (a) the amount of the debt (b) that the CA is attempting to collect from the right consumer (c) that the CA isn't attempting to charge fees which are not authorized by law or the contract. But to most collection agency's after reading ACA's treatise on validation would argue that anything other than a 1 page printout from their own system is being a generous validation response.
You base that on every agency being a member of the ACA, which is not true. PRA, last I knew, is not a member of the ACA, therefore, any talk about the ACA's policies or advice doesnt mean anything.
I'll tell you why. You get a card with a $400 limit. It gets charged up to that limit (not actually all $400 since its at 28% APR, more like about $375 in charges) then a single late payment tags it as over the limit after the fees get applied to it, and add a $30 OTL fee, along with the ever increasing amount of interest. They give you a minimum payment of $25, which you, being a stupid college student, pay without thinking about the consequences. After loyally paying for 2 years, sending them $550 towards the $375 in charges and watching the balance balloon up the payments were stopped. It made it up to an alleged $1,600 by the time it was charged off, and now it's in the area of $3,000. Through the unfair practices of the credit card companies (I think they *SHOULD* require the credit card company to show a minimum requested payment that will bring the balance down to where additional fees won't be charged) I have been saddled with 17% auto loans and have been unable to get a mortgage. So don't tell me to grow up and pay the scumbags who paid $10 for this old debt and hope to swindle $3,000 for it. In the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act under section 808: Unfair practices [15 USC 1692f] part 5 it is unlawful for an attempt to collect a debt to be causing charges to be made to any person. As such, calls to a cellular telephone would fall under that article, and then make them liable. They called a cell phone, and I have to pay for every minute that comes into my phone. It's always a daytime call, and I only have 300 anytime minutes with my phone, and have gone over during the same months that I have received calls from these morons, paying $.59 a minute.
If this debt is out of SOL, I would send them a FOAD letter. I would also let them know they are not to sell, transfer, or assign this account or any of my personal information to any other organization. Don't put up with the crap from these scumbags.
collectman... Even non-members can leech off of the advice which is available on the NON-MEMBERS ONLY section of ACA... Guess what... all of the articles, advice, and recommendations which I EVER refer to are what is not MEMBERS ONLY information. Don't get me wrong, collectman... 99% of what you say doesn't get under my skin, but the phrasing of your initial response here in this thread got my collar from liquid o2 to boiling in 2 seconds flat... Collectman, if you look at my suit on point, the CA BRAGGED that she knew that she was calling on a cell phone... "Oh, I thought that this was *HIS* cell phone."... That takes any reasonable doubt that it was an honest mistake off of the table... If they call, and don't KNOW that it's a cell phone, and respect the "it's inconvenient for you to call any number, let lone this number that I, or any member of my family has to pay for", I don't bother them... The staff of the CA in question pulled out the quotes from the Il v. Arrow playbook, "There isn't anything that says that we can't call you any way that we see fit." The CA in question also boasts that they are specially accredited by ACA as being in the top 1% of CA members in their compliance with the FDCPA & FCRA.
Unfair practices? Who is the one who stopped paying again? Who signed the contract and probably didn't read everything on it before doing so? Who is the one who was not financially responsible enough to finish his financial obligation? Oh yeah, you, the debtor. It's all the credit card companies fault that you dont know how to budget or use simple calculators to find out how much it will take to pay off the balance in a certain number of months. It's their fault they lent you hundreds, or thousands of dollars just with your word/signature you'll pay them back.
They own the account and can do whatever they want with the account, including selling the account to another agency if they wish.
Note 3: Can they call my cell phone? The short answer is yes! If you provided your cell number on a credit application or to the creditor as a means of contacting you, then collectors can call your cell phone. The only way to stop them from calling you on your cell phone (or any other phone) is to send a "stop calling letter". I read the case, but it's from the mid to late 90's, many people have switched to cell phones only, got a case to show from the last year or two?
Until that case is overturned or changed it is valid. Doesn't matter what the date is. Funny how collectors will dig up cases from 80 years ago that don't even apply, but a consumer has to have a case from yesterday. The link you posted in your last message supports everything Jam has been saying. You don't want to call a cell phone because it leads to too many problems and puts you at risk of violations. One last note. FDCPA violations have absolutely nothing to do with the consumers payments or lack thereof. It is a seperate issue, and the reason why most, if not all, courts do not allow a counterclaim on the underlying debt for FDCPA suits by consumers. It doesn't matter if you are calling the worst deadbeat in the world, who set out to commit fraud. It is still a violation if you do anything not allowed in the statute. So stop crying about consumers not paying or not reading their contracts. it does not apply.
BTW, do they send all collectors to a school to learn all these myths and untruths about consumers, or is it just inbred in them? If you are going to try and lecture someone on a subject, at least have the courtesy to know something about it first. Your responses only prove why it is so easy for consumers to win FDCPA violation cases.
Collectman, there are even more recent articles from ACA. October, 2006 - When Technology & The Law Collide Which delves into the potential TCPA issues involved in calling cell phone numbers, as well as the FDCPA issues. The key lesson in these articles from ACA is that collectors calling cell phones are doing so at their own peril.
But remember, if you would have read your contract and paid on time you would never had this problem. We do not lend money to see you fail, it just looks that way....Your friend, the CA agency . Now pay me the thousands of dollars i have swindled out of the pennies you borrowed, love Collectman...
