OK, here' the story: Ex-GF ran up a cell phone bill in my name (without my knowledge or authorization) then moved w/o telling phone company leaving final bill unpaid. Found out about this when I noticed I had a collection account for said final bill. After going around and around with CA, I finally got to the point where I had everything figured out and tried to pay the account but the 1st CA returned the account to phone co. Got a letter from another CA saying I owed on the phone bill (while I was still trying to pay the first CA) Sent DV, never heard from them again. Called phone company to try and pay (again), they say they have no such account. A year later (last fall), I get a letter from another CA/JDB re: some phone bill. Didn't recognize any of the account #s so sent a DV. Last month I get a photocopy of the final bill from aforementioned account (with ex-GF's address, but my name) Wrote a letter to phone company (using address provided in validation info) to see if current CA is collecting on the account. 4 weeks later, they post a collection account to the CRA 6 weeks later and no reply from phone co. but, CA sends me a letter saying they are authorized to collect because they bought debt from some other company (none of the previously mentioned) who said they could collect. Seems a bit circular, but not surprising. I'd like to hear this from the OC, but that's probably not likely (is that a good thing?) So... I suppose they've DV'd to the extent required by FDCPA. So far, they've played it by the book. The only possible case for an FDCPA violation might be the balance they are reporting, but that's a stretch. To me, it seems unfair and deceptive to evade my attempts to pay for two years then stick me with 3-yrs interest and a collection account on my credit report. But UDP might be a tough case to prove (as far as meeting the requirements). Any tips? So there it is. Any thoughts, suggestions? I don't mind paying the original balance but I don't want it on my credit report and I don't want to see it come back to visit next year. SOL still has three more years left.
Maybe send the phone co a payment and see if they cash it.I know it might not be the smart thing but if they cash it then the ca has no reason to collect on a paid bill?Just a wild thought.As my husband told me he sometimes use the *wag* to repair video games and juke boxes .The wag method is a wild ass guess.
Since you aren't liable for bills run up by neighbors, "Ex-GFs" or dogs that poop in your yard, your defense is that it isn't your bill. People who open accounts in your name are committing crimes. You should talk to the police.
Wrong approach, bad advice. The defense is that the debt is obviously outside of stat regardless of what state the OP lives in. This is one of the few times when a full cease & desist letter is appropriate. Let them sue and then take them to federal court for misrepresenting the legal status of the debt.
Thanks for the ideas. Unfortunately the DOFD is July/August 2006 so I'm thinking that it's still within my state's 6-yr SOL. Re: Fraud, it's not that simple. We opened the account while we were together but before/during breaking up, I thought we'd transferred the ownership to her. I found out later, that all they did was transfer the mailing address to her home (under my name) so I never saw it again until it showed up in collections. So, it's not like I don't want to pay it, but for the past two years, it's been bouncing in and out of collection agencies, each one presenting a new complication (not responding to inquiries, not validating the information, etc.) Like I said, I don't mind paying it, but I want to make sure I'm paying the person/company/CA who is authorized to collect it so it doesn't come back to visit next year. Also, I refuse to let this show up (or stay) on my credit report and I'll fight that to the supreme court. The only reason it's in collections is because the phone company and their subsequent collection agencies aren't organized enough to give me the confidence (as in paperwork, not telephone reassurances) that if I pay, it'll actually go away. I'd do a PFD if they'll take it, if not, it looks like I'll have to take 'em to court. It's not that I mind doing that, but my wife says I need to find a new hobby
So Dumb Bob was wrong? The poster said the following: "Unfortunately the DOFD is July/August 2006 so I'm thinking that it's still within my state's 6-yr SOL." So it would appear that claiming that it is SOL is right out too. Dumb Bob believes that his original jibber jabber, NOT "advice", was not completely inane given that the poster had said this as well: "Ex-GF ran up a cell phone bill in my name (without my knowledge or authorization) then..." If someone runs up bills in your name without your knowledge, that seems like it's illegal. A police report is the sort of thing that a judge might ask you about if you say that someone else opened the account without your permission. So even if you have them on the SOL, you think, you might want a back up plan.
Even if it were a valid claim, and I think it's clearly in a grey area, filing a fraud claim would have lots of negative repercussions (e.g. having the ex swoop in on her broom to visit). I'd rather deal with the collection agencies/JDBs.
So you aren't going to file a police report, does that mean you are going to agree that it is your debt? Because since you didn't spend the money or agree to it being spent or even know about it, it seems like you might at least have the argument that you don't owe it, even without the police report. But Dumb Bob doesn't know if that would be enough. And you are now before any lawsuit, which you obviously wish to avoid if possible. Regarding just paying it and maybe it doesn't go away. How would you know that it would go away no matter what you did or didn't do? There really isn't any way to know for sure because anyone with the information about the account, anyone who kept it from when they had it or otherwise knows can call you up and demand money. Of course this is a very wrong thing to do but it certainly is something that can happen.
Yes, I believe that both Dumb Bob and the OP are wrong. I believe that Title 47 Chapter 5 subchapter IV § 415. Limitations of actions defines the statute of limitations on cell phone bills as being two years except in certain circumstances and I also believe that the time elapsed from July/August of 2006 until the time they file a lawsuit is greater than two years. The OP has not stated that they have filed any lawsuit as of yet, the length of time until they do file a lawsuit continues to increase putting it more and more outside the federal SOL. I may be as green as a gourd and as dumb as a fencepost but I just happen to believe that since it is outside the federal SOL, sending them a full cease & desist, then filing a federal case against them under FDCPA if they continue to attempt to collect or contact the OP in any way except to inform the OP what further action they intend to take would be a violation of § 805. Communication in connection with debt collection 15 USC 1692c(3). I also happen to believe that in the event they actually filed a lawsuit they might then be in violation of §807 which deals with misrepresenting the legal status of the debt. I would appreciate it very much if Dumb Bob would explain whether I am wrong about that and if so why.
I agree with Bob here and in addition, I would dispute the tradeline through the credit reporting agencies. Do so in writing and dispute the account type, date of last activity/status and any field that is incompletle. You'll accrue some "FCRA" violation as well as FDPCA violation that you can us to offset the debt and then some. Plus, it may just be deleted.
Hey, I don't mind being wrong, if being corrected works in my favor. Feel free to correct me all you want It looks like: does limit the SOL, unless the cell-phone companies have some secret, hidden, exemption, of course. Then there's the arbitration clause in the terms of use that say all disputes will be resolved through binding arbitration. I'm not sure if that's relevant or not. In any case, thanks for the cite. It might be time to start turning up the heat on them...
I agree. In fact, that's in the works... The request for verification by the CRA is stewing in their office as I type. That it's out of SOL might be enough to make them pack up and go home if I give them a sternly worded phone call (followed up by a letter). We'll see...
Those arbitraton clauses are always stricken when you invoke a statutory violation. Don't worry about them.
Here's an interesting case. Apparently this is not the first time this has happened (not by a long shot) with a JDB and a cell-phone bill. http://www.adrforum.com/adr_CaseDetails.aspx?caseid=1673
If this ruling applies to cell phones wouldn't this also have a point in a dispute to a collector on most other bill's,including cc's,and other contracts,assigned or sold to a ca?
With regards to the assignment of rights, I would think so. The above isn't the best application of 47 U.S.C. 415 (a), however.
I don't think so. I have yet to see or hear of any law or court decision that says that assigning a debt has anything to do with changing the SOL in any state. What is it in that case that suggests such a thing?
When i looked through it again the key part of the ruling was.The jdb wasn't a cell phone provider,but a debt collector,that bought the contract and all the provisions of the contract didn't pertain to the sale is that correct? Thats what i got when i looked it over again.So i can see were it wouldn't pertain to certain laws.however it could be worth a shot with a local court.
Sorry for the confusion... On the one hand, a cell-phone (or any other "common carrier") debt would be limited to a 2-yr SOL per the citation above. On the other, a JDB doesn't always get all the rights granted to the OC in the original contract unless they can prove it. (e.g. arbitration in the link I posted). I got my search motives mixed up. Palisades is a pretty notorious outfit, apparently, in that they showed up in both searches.
