The intent of FDCPA has nothing to do with fair debt collection practices or debt collectors. The true legislative purpose and intent of FDCPA is to facilitate the collection of money owed to the federal government by the government! I was doing some research into VA law this afternoon and ran across that tidbit in a PDF file put out by the Veteran's Administration. What attracted my attention was a link to a law dealing with garnishment of bank accounts. They even make it easy for banks to tell almost instantly whether a bank deposit contains government deposited funds or not by putting an X in the 22 digit slot of all documentation accompanying government deposits. Banks can't allow garnishment of any money equal to or less than the amount of that deposit amount and must examine each and every new demand for garnishment of any bank account deposit during the last 60 days to see whether or not any deposit during that last 60 days since to see if the 22nd digit slot contains an X or not. Under proposed new legislation recently introduced banks who do not do their due diligence when dealing with garnishment orders can be sued under FDCPA for their failure to do their research. Under the new proposed legislation banks cannot be held responsible to local or federal courts for failure to comply with court orders until they have completed their review of the last 60 days of deposits to see if any of the accompanying paperwork has an X in the 22nd position of their document although I don't know yet which documents they are talking about but I think the transmittal document showing where the deposit came from. Not sure what they call that yet. Anyway, the shocker is that we have obviously been lied to all along about what the true purpose of FDCPA really was. Not that it really makes a lot of difference now anyway. What is important is what new changes in garnishment law this proposed new legislation will bring about when it becomes law if it hasn't already.
Uuuum, what does that have to do with FDCPA? FDCPA does not set guide lines for garnishment of bank accounts or anything of that nature. That is regulated by the state law. Have you read the actual FDCPA?
I hate to bust your bubble for you but FDCPA does regulate garnishment of bank accounts when pensions are involved. Otherwise it does not. Garnishment is regulated by several federal statutes as well. You would not have asked that question if you had ever read any of my other posts here and on many other boards as well.
Hmmm. Perhaps you can point me in the right direction, but I am really struggling to find any provision in Title 15, Chapter 41, Section 1692 of USC, that regulates any sort of garnishment. Would you mind directing me to a particular section? Not that i am purposely trying to be a b!%ch or something, but I just do not see anything related to garnishment in the actual FDCPA text, so it would be interesting to see what i am missing here. Thanks
Pensions cannot legally be garnished. Under FDCPA it is illegal to do or threaten to do that which is illegal for them to do.
The only relation there is is for collectors to threaten legal action if they do not actually intend to do so.... Again, nothing about garnishments. Please explain what you meant by "Re: FDCPA is not about debt collectors like we all thouht it does." Because even if you simplify it down to collectors not being able to garnish pensions but threatening to do so, then it is still about debt collectors, so you really got me confused. And still, some pensions can be garnished...
Or cannot legally be taken. You are putting restrictions on the law which do not actually appear within the 4 corners of the law. I didn't mean anything. I was not the author of that concept. I was merely reporting what I read in an exerpt from a proposed new law. I gave the reference to where I found that statement so if you want to argue the point go back and follow the links.