at the begining when the account is assig to UCB they have to send you a letter calld DN letter. that letter explains everything
1.Don't give them your information ever. 2.Do not ever dip into your 401k to pay a collection account 3.Make them prove they own it 4.How old is this debt.They might not be able to collect on it. 5.They do have to send you a balance once a year it's in one of the law's and i don't remember which. 6.let's consider a phone call.hello i'm from so and so bank and i need your ss number would you give it.you can answer that.
From the consumer's perspective, the CA/JDB has someone's SSAN and someone's personal info. Once you give them your info, they can say "oops, I guess we had the wrong info on this account, we'd better update with your info. Now it belongs to you and you just verified it. Tread carefully. Remember, this call/letter is regarding a debt collection. Any information will be used for that purpose.
Ucb -collections HI, I ALSO AM RECEIVING CALLS/LETTERS FROM THIS COLLECTION AGENCY THEY ARE THREATENING ME THAT I HAVE TO PAY THE FULL BALANCE WHICH I OWE FOR VERIZON WIRELESS WHICH I COULD NOT PAY AND THEY TURNED MY SERVICE OFF AND FORWARDED THE ACCOUNT TO COLLECTION AGENCY. I TOLD THEM I CAN ONLY SEND WHAT I CAN AFFORD AND THEY SAID THEY WILL NOT ACCEPT PAYMENTS AND THAT I HAVE TO PAY THE FULL BALANCE NOW OR LEGAL ACTION WILL BE TAKEN. I NEED ADVICE? CAN ANYONE HELP ME OUT HERE I AM A FULL TIME STUDENT AT COLLEGE STRUGGLING TO BECOME A RN AND I WORK ONLY PART TIME FOR STORE AND MAKE MINIMUM WAGE AND I LIVE HAND TO MOUTH.
When did you make your last payment to Verizon? That is important because there is 2 year statute of limitations on cell phone bills regardless of which state you live in.
This might sound like a bit of a dumb question, but I'm curious to know exactly what that means? Does that mean that a company is no longer legally able to attempt a collection on cell phone debt after two years? How would this affect efforts to dispute a negative entry that was from a cell phone bill, if at all?
They are legally able to attempt to collect forever but cannot legally file a lawsuit against you. Of course, that does not mean that they cannot file a lawsuit against you and it does not mean that they can't get a judgment against you if you fail to respond to their lawsuit in a timely manner with the proper response motions. Of course, since those are all federal laws you would not only have to respond to their local suit if they do file one but if you want to punish them for their violations you would have to file a federal case against them. The federal SOL on cellphone debt would have no bearing on credit reports.
Thanks! that helps a lot... I see everyone tossing around "SOL"... and while I've always known what it stands for, I wasn't necessarily clear on what those limitations actually entailed. Is that same set of rules applicable for any case in which one would use the phrase "SOL"? (within the context of credit reporting and legal actions, of course)
The otherside of the coin I already know some people are going to have a field day but oh well! I work at UCB as a collector and just like any where else in life there are good people and bad people. 1. Yes we have to send a letter it is called a disclosure notice, but we use the address the original creditor gives us with the account. So if they dont have good info due to the fact you moved and didnt give it to them then...? 2. We do need to verify your ssn/dob to make sure you are you!!! And the collectors can not change the basic name ssn dob info just address, job, spouse and residence. 3. Depending on the type of account we do sue/garnish it is not a threat! 4. We do not purchase debt!!!! We are contracted by our clients to collect the debt in full and if not in full to make payment arrangements that collect the debt in full in a timely manner. And like I previously stated their are good and bad people with every job! It is not an easy job! Some people curse you out at hello! I have been called everything in the book and that was just during the mini miranda. Some people just rack up bills and then dont pay them. true enough some people have financial problems but is it appropriate to curse me out because you owe a debt. We have bills too! not all of us are ignorant mean unwilling to help people!
Quite so but while I am very vocal about debt collectors you won't find me trying to make a field day out of who you are and what you do. Debt collectors do provide a valuable and necessary service in our society whether people like it or not. The problem is not debt collectors but how they often go about doing their job. One of the problems seems to be that most of them are ill trained or at least seem to be. For instance, why is it that debt collectors never seem to understand what debt validation is nor what is required of them when a debtor demands that they validate the alleged debt. The concept of debt validation has been around ever since FDCPA came into existance yet no debt collector seems to understand it or what is required of them in order to successfully complete a debt validation. And the list of things that debt collectors should be required to know but obviously either don't know or deliberately choose to ignore. Why is that? That is what skip tracers are for. They assure that you have the right person and their correct address and other information. Of course that costs money so your bosses don't want to have to spend any money to be sure they have the right person in their sights. They'd rather get off on the cheap and hope for the best. The results are that in a few cases the wrong person gets hung whether they owe the debt or not. It happens because far too many people are ignorant and gullible. They don't know how to fight back against false accusations and often end up with judgments because of their ignorance or because they can't prove that they don't owe the debt. They ended up in court and in front of a hanging judge and got a judgment against them. And still they didn't know what to do about it. But then, those are few and far between and don't really count for nothing. It was all their fault, wasn't it? Don't see that makes much difference. No, it isn't a threat. It is a promise that comes true better than 95% of the time. The reason it does is because the truth of the matter is that the debtor does owe the debt. Everybody knows that so there really is no valid defense to that complaint. Under all normal conditions nobody should have any room to complain. What has that to do with anything? Of course not. Which brings up the question of what you can do to help anybody who is in debt? What do you call helping people? I've seen lots of debt collectors claim they have some way to help people but I've never seen them promote any thing that would help people to do anything but rid them of some if not all their cash. I really doubt you can answer that question but I invite you to go ahead and try.
Get rid of some or all of their cash??? If you owe a debt pay it! That is part of the problem you make it seem like it is a scam of some type! Our job is not customer service because the debtor is not our customer! Our job is to collect the debt from the debtor for our client. And in my opinion coming to a payment plan that will satisfy my customer as well as the debtor is a form of helping. You may not see it that way you may have ran across a collector that was less than helpful. and as far as training...I think you have some valid points. I have dealt with some dumb ass collectors for my own bills. As far as skip tracing there is general basic report ran on all accounts in our department when they come into the office, but if we get the debt april of 2009 the report says your address is valid and we get a mail return and a collector/skip tracer doesnt find any valid information. Should we waste time or company money hunting people down for a debit they know they owe and if so for how long? And as far as a judgement...I have never in all the years I have been a collector heard of a judgement being placed on the wrong person. I am not saying it isnt possible but we have procedure before a judgement is even a thought. When we verify employment your employer verfies ssn dob home address as well as income information, so if someone used your information to aquire the debt we are talking about something totally different. And another thing the creditor gave us the information on file...how did they get the information if it wasnt good information you gave them? Someone gave your info? You gave bad info? Who is responsible for that? And with validating the debt yes if the debtor asks for it it is provided, but in some cases people do use it as a stall. If depends on the situation. Prime example: Debtor calls into the office says they pulled credit report found the debit. I advise of date of service and client and balance they say they want something proving the validity of the debt. We spoke to them previously no mail return on disclosure they also received eob and itemized statement from the client. Do we send another itemized statement or is this a stall? We talk to so many people who simple stall and try and get of paying their debts it is probably the biggest reason it is probably hard for honest people. But all in all you still proved my general point! The general tone of your reply was rude and sarcastic! This is the environment we work in all day long. You talk to mean rude people all day...you sit next to someone who talks to rude mean people all day...and guess what...that person sits next to someone who is getting cursed at right now...you have an attitude about nothing other than the phone is ringing and you know that person is not going to be pleasant...then you get a message from your supervisor who is reminding you of the number the client expects you to hit and you are no where near it because guess what the economy is bad but you cant afford to lose your job...or you wil be an unemployed DEBTOR. A MIX MADE IN HELL OR THE CIRCLE OF LIFE. I think we need to start a bill collectors appreciation week! I am sure I won't get that one off the ground! lol
Great advice! At least it is great advice to those who have the means to pay their just debts. To those who are not so fortunate it is nothing but an insult to human intelligence. Just depends on which side of the economic fence one happens to have landed on. Again, depending on which side of the economic fence one is on, that can appear to be exactly that. Nothing more, nothing less. I can understand that line of reasoning. A COLLECTOR??? Quite frankly, I've never heard of such an animal as a helpful collector. Sorry about that but that's the long and the short of it. I've heard them claim to be such but have never actually ran into such a thing. Makes no difference whether it is a stall or not. Do you send another itemized statement or not? The answer to that is quite simple but as with most debt collectors I have ever heard of, you obviously don't know the answer. The answer is simple. Obey the law and you won't have any problems. Fail to obey the law and what it requires you to do and your company can be sued and you can be sued personally as well. Regardless of what your company might tell you, you can be sued personally for your failure to comply with the mandates of the law. Don't rely on what somebody tells you what the law requires of you. Learn the law for yourself. Study the court decisions to see what the courts have ruled. While it is an excellent case to study, it is also a bit difficult to really understand what happened but Spears vs Brennan, 7th Cir. Ct. of Appeals is one case you should study and learn the lessons it has to teach. Another and even better one is Fields vs Wilburlawfirm, 7th Cir. Ct. of Appeals, Judge Kenneth Minh presiding. There are many, many more cases you need to be familiar with and understand. If you study and understand some of those cases and FDCPA plus FCRA then you won't be thinking in terms of whether or not the debtor is stalling but rather what it is that you and your company must do to comply with the mandates of the law. You won't be telling consumers that you already validated the debt when both of you should know better. You will simply tell the debtor that you will provide him/her with the validation and bid them a good day and set the wheels in motion to get the job done. What else do you expect from people who do not have the funds to pay with? If they had the funds they would not be in the position they are in now. You would never speak to them because their bills would be paid on time. It is easy to take the viewpoint that people are deadbeats because most of the people you speak to have no other choice but to stall to the greatest extent possible. When you work in that kind of an environment it is easy to get the mindset that almost everybody must be deadbeats but that is a very jaundiced point of view and not at all accurate. You don't have to even try. ACA is already trying to do that with videos and any other means available to them but with all their money and influence they aren't having much luck either. Sorry to be so rude as to say that it is about like trying to put lipstick on a pig. Don't help. On the other hand, I'm truly sorry you feel that I was rude and sarcastic. That was not my intent nor is it in this message. I've been there years ago, long before there was such a thing as FDCPA or rules and you could get away with just about anything except actually going to the debtor's home and committing a physical assault on them so I know what you are up against. I know things are rough in the collections industry right now but I also know that they are going to get a lot tougher in the not too distant future. With an estimated 20 million people out of work and a few hundred thousand more getting laid off every week nothing is going to be easy in the near future. Another factor that bodes ill for the collection industry is the fact that more and more consumers are becoming educated about their rights under the law and filing federal lawsuits against their tormentors at an ever increasing rate. To add to that, the NY AG has just opened the flood gates to lawsuits against employees of collection agencies such as yourself. So things are bound to get much tougher in the near future for all of us.
I see a couple of misplaced assumptions. The collector assumes that the information they've received from their client is accurate and valid. And it could very well be that it is. But, now let's look at it from the consumer's side. Out of the blue, usually, the consumer gets a phone call or letter from someone they've never heard of and never had any business with. The first thing they hear is how they owe this stranger money. I'm sorry, Mr/Ms collector but I don't know you. Maybe I owe some creditor money or maybe I don't, but either way, I know I've never had a business dealing with you so I don't owe you anything just because you say so. I don't know that some creditor has hired you to collect some money so until you demonstrate that to me (ideally with some corroboration from the OC), you're just some voice on the phone trying to shake me down. I have no way of knowing whether you're authorized to collect on behalf of the original creditor or you're someone looking to defraud me of of some money. Let me relate a recent experience of mine... I get a letter from a CA about some old bill with an account number that was not familiar. I ask for validation and the name and address of the OC (per the FDCPA). Eventually, I get the requested information and I try to contact the OC, using the information provided, to ask if they know about this account and if the collection agent is the one who is authorized to collect it. The OC never answered (well, to date, they haven't). I let the CA know that I'm trying to confirm their authorization to collect and I'm more than willing to pay them if this is my debt and if I can get confirmation from the OC they are the ones to pay. The CA replies that the debt was sold by the OC to some other third party for whom they (the CA) are acting as the collection agent. OK, so they say. But it seems a bit suspicious to me that the only place I can get confirmation the CA is authorized to collect is from the CA. To me that smells like a scam. The CA then stopped corresponding about this so they were neither willing nor able to provide any evidence that they were authorized to collect on the debt(smells more like a scam). Now, what I'd like to know is how it is unreasonable for people to be reluctant to hand over money to anyone who calls them on the phone or sends them some official-sounding letter? To me, that just sounds foolish (however common). To the CA, the burden of proof is on the consumer, but, from where I sit, the burden of proof is on the collector.
Well said, Bob. But those are just the tip of the iceberg. What must be considered here is not only that debt collectors are poorly trained in the law but automatically assume that the information they have in front of their eyes is true and correct in all aspects when that may not be true at all. Another assumption that could lead them into trouble is that the debt is not outside the statute of limitations which is not always easily discernible even by judges and lawyers. Untold numbers of people have paid debt collectors for debts that they don't even owe any more just because the debt collector claimed they owed the money. Many more have paid debts they don't owe just to stop the hounding. Another question is how the debt collector can possibly know whether the demanded amount of money can be true and correct if the debt has been put on their desk after having passed through several other agencies over a time period of several years? The poster keeps talking about people who are or might be just demanding validation to stall off paying the debt. I've known people who have demanded validation and were provided with more than enough documentation to prove the validity of the debt only to get back a letter which simply said in big black ink I refuse to pay and nothing more. So I'd like to know how this poster would react to that. What would s/he or the company s/he works for do about that? After all, if they got such a letter from a debtor they would have proof positive that the person has no intention whatever of paying any money. True or not, they would then have at least minimal justification for calling that person a deadbeat, wouldn't they? (LOL). And what is the response this poster uses when the debtor tells them that the debt is disputed and validation is demanded? I've heard of many different responses such as the following and more: (1) We have already validated the debt. (2) Are you saying that you dispute the debt? What is it that you dispute? (3) You have to do that in writing. I don't have to validate unless you send it to me in writing. (4) Are you saying you don't owe the debt? (5) Are you saying someone stole your identity? (6) Are you saying that you lost your credit card and someone else found it and charged up all this stuff? And many, many more responses to a demand for validation far too numerous to mention here. And what about the fact that if I pay the debt collector all that they claim I owe I can't ever get a receipt for my money? Why is that? And what about the fact that many debt collectors will try to collect money on an account where a decision stating that no money is owed on the debt has already been rendered by a court of law years ago? I've actually had that happen to me and it has happened to lots of other people as well. Although it wasn't true in my case because I've never filed bankruptcy, many people are hounded about debts that were resolved in bankruptcy courts years ago.
My experience with the few CAs I've had the pleasure of dealing with does not resemble the rather utopian view described by BilcColGal. I can't speak for the debtors BCG describes but I consider myself responsible and not a deadbeat. I've made some mistakes, sure, but I do the best I can. WRT a debt, if I know that the debt is mine I'll pay it. If I don't know you or I don't know what you're talking about, I'm going to ask for confirmation before I even think of sending you any money. I want something in writing that describes the debt. I want to be able to confirm those details with the original creditor. I want something in writing that you are authorized to collect the debt. I want something in writing that says the debt has been settled once it's been paid. Tell me how that is unreasonable? IMO, anything less would be irresponsible. BilcColGal calls it stalling. (toMAto, toMAHto). But, the business model of a CA is about collecting the most from the most. Period. In the end, it's all about volume. Anything that gets in the way that (like verification and validation, etc.) is just not a priority.
It is the age old problem of the kettle calling the pot black. The poster accuses others of being deadbeats while trying to make her industry and her side look like the white hat side and the debtors the black hat side of the equation. I was asked just today to look at an affidavit in a Nebraska case to see if it might be a false and fraudulent document or not. Of course it is. False and fraudulent documents are filed in courts all across the land by the hundreds if not by the thousands every day and they routinely get away with it simply because as usual debtors, lawyers and judges alike have no idea that they are false, misleading and fraudulent. In most cases even those who are the affiants may not realize that what they are swearing to is false and misleading or why. Unlike many, the one I just posted on my links page looks innocent enough but it is false and does contain false information because the affiants can only testify to that which they have first hand knowledge of and it is obvious upon it's face that this affiant can't possibly have the first hand knowledge that is claimed. Furthermore, the amount of money the affiant claims is due and owing is not the amount being sued for. What about the extra amounts? Are they true and correct or not? That affidavit alone opens the door to a federal lawsuit against the plaintiff, the lawyer and the affiant. They want a bit more than $1500 now. The federal court case will demand much more than that, ending up somewhere above $2,000 and the $1500 won't even come close to what it will cost them in attorney fees which I would guess will cost them at least that much apiece. If this is a small claims case the defendant may want to end up filing a district court case against the plaintiff and the attorney for that false affidavit. That would drag the case out of small claims and into district court where discovery can be used. There are other reasons for getting it out of small claims as well. But my point is that if debt collectors routinely break the law and lie then what room do they have to complain about stall tactics by debtors? It becomes self evident that those who constantly prevaricate can't be trusted for much of anything.
first of all I didnt call anybody a deadbeat nor did i imply that "I" treat anyone like a deadbeat this whole whoopla started because I wanted to say that not all collectors are crap! Yep there are some horrible collectors, but there are some good ones! And guess what there are some bad debtors and some good ones! Some people use what they think they know about the law to stall. that was my point! You may think there is no such thing as a good/helpful collector but guess what you are wrong. And just so you know it depends on the person...I would ask questions about why they are disputing the debt or why they want a validation too. Depending on the circumstances and the account that may not help the person...that may not be what they need. ****Example if someone committed fraud/id theft an I/S is not going to help them fix the problem they have to go different route. ie police report ****If we are collecting for someone who has purchased debit but they paid it prior to the debit being purchased that isnt going to help them they need proof of paymnt from who thye paid it to. ****If it is a medical bill and insurance didnt pay/wasnt billed/out of network validation isnt going to help that is an insurance issue. Appeal with insurance. So yet again my point is...not all collector are just trying to make it hard for you. the funny thing about it is people act like we dont have the same problems. I just went through so much crap trying to get an electric bill out of my name for a house I had never even seen let alone lived in. I thank God I knew what to do to fix it. If I would have just requested a validation letter I probably would still be stuck with a 600 bill for someone else's utility use. Or if I didnt know about the charity program (HCAP) I may have tried to killed myself because of the hundreds of thousands of medical bills for my daughter that I still had to file chapter 7 on. NOT ALL COLLECTORS ARE WORRIED ABOUT VOLUME! NOT ALL COLLECTORS THINK THEIR JOB IS TO TORMENT PEOPLE. AND NOT ALL COLLECTORS ARE LESS THAN HELPFUL. So as you already know you are entitled to your opinion and Im sure it has to be a reason you feel the way you do but just like you think all collectors think people are deadbeats MOST people just assume that collector on the other end of the phone is going to be crappy so when they call they dont even give you a chance. When people ask what I do I always tell them I get cursed out for a living. As people use to say you catch more flies with honey. I think it is all in your approach! If you call yelling scream curse or quoting a bunch of laws?? What is the necessity in all that crap. Yes the collector is going to ask questions that is there job if the original creditor hired them to collect the debt that is what they expect them to do. So anything above that they need to let them know...john smith requested a validation letter because the account is not familar to them! John smith wants a payment history because he calculated the balance to be different. John smith wants a itemized statement because you charged too much.
I appreciate that BilcColGal's sharing what life is like on the other side of the validation request. But, she doesn't have to take our comments so personally. I have never talked to her so I can't comment on what SHE is like as a collection agent. I can just relate the experiences I've had and what I've picked up here and there. As I read it, she agrees that some CAs are less abusive than others. I've actually not talked to one who's been abusive (I wish! Cha-Ching!) At the same time, they've been somewhat less than completely helpful (for me or for them). They've been interested in thing: me sending them money. When they figure out that I'm not going to send anything until I get the items I listed above, they quickly lose interest, which is probably best for all concerned.
She seems to have came here with the preconceived notion that she was going to be abused here as well. Quite frankly I appreciate her being here because I know for a fact that she has a lot to offer this community. All that needs to happen is for us all to get past this initial hurdle and off into a more meaningful discussion with her and she could teach us a great deal. I get the impression that she is really a very nice person at heart. So I'd like to see us get down to more productive conversations with this lady and find out more about how the collections industry works today. That's my .02 in this matter.
