Sorry for another question but after pouring through the archive and some other boards I was hoping I could get some opinions on this. I want to start DVing and Disputing, ASAP, as you all know from my previous threads (thank you again for taking the time to read and respond). Without going into too much detail, I would rather fax these docs instead of making various trips to the post office, not to mention faxing would be much more cost effective. I believe having a proof of fax delivered (which you get once the fax goes through) would be the same as having a green card. Feel free to tell me if case law contradicts this! I don't know how this would work for anything other than disputing or DV (and I don't plan to do this for medical; I want to follow the HIPAA plan for that) and I'm not trying to get ahead of myself here, just trying to finish mapping out my plan. Of course, I would need the accurate fax for the CRAs and CAs, but provided I have that, what are you opinions on this method? I'm hoping Jam will weigh-in b/c I *believe* I have read in some of his posts he has used this method for DV. I could be wrong though, since I have read SO much. Thank you all in advance. It is greatly appreciated.
Yes. The key is that you have a receipt for the fax. I prefer faxing better, for one reason... They forget that faxes generate a confirmation page, which would be further backed up by phone records. One of my best cases, I had over a half-dozen faxes that I sent, and they kept up inconvenient communications, and collecting before validation. I can not confirm or deny what was in the last envelope that I received from them...
I just set-up an efax subscription. Seems much more convenient, although scanning of docs (since I don't have a landline) may be a bit of a pain. But it sure beats a drive to the PO! Thanks for weighing Jam!
OK, so I faxed DVs last night, including language that said do not call me, only communicate via US Mail. I have the fax submission it went through. One JUST called me! I seriously COULD NOT believe it! Jam if you're still around, how would you handle? Send another letter/fax stating they are in violation of the DV/C&D? I didn't expect any communication until letters in a few weeks. They didn't leave a message and they called my cell (my caller id picked their number up).
Wow, they violated 805 (a)(1) just like that? Talk about an easy violation. A VM from them would of been golden....my only concern is that they could claim the call was a mistake and disconnected before communicating with you. BUT if it keeps happening (calls without MSG), THAT would be something else. The next step is for you Jam
I've been reading the FDCPA and FCRA (and TCPA) but it's a lot to digest obviously. I asked someone else about it before I got an answer here and they told me that collectors are allowed to call once to tell you what action they are going to take. I'm trying to find something on that b/c I keep seeing conflicting info about it. If I said NO CALLS, how can they can they call? I should've answered and I had a recorder all ready to go, but the debt is only in husband's name (I think, as it is not on my report) so not sure how that could help. If I do remember correctly, hang-ups or not leaving messages are considered violations since they are not disclosing they are debt collectors etc. etc. but I could be mistaken.
Ok. I'm a fairly bright person, and one of the things I love about the law is that it is open to interpretation and can be argued. So, please be gentle and I'm sorry if I sound slow. I send a letter saying ALL telephone communications are inconvenient. Communicate ONLY by US Mail. How, can they then have this ONE freebie, if you will, phone call to tell me whatever from 805 (c) 1-3. Wouldn't they send that through the mail? Like requested? You know I aced Con Law, Contracts 1, Enviro Law, Rules & Procedure, Crim Law, and Bus Law but this is making my head spin. I think because it's personal and I'm emotional about it and frankly it's embarrassing. I just think I could easily argue I said no phone communication, you immediately communicated by phone, that's a violation. I should be reading case law instead of just statute...
At xx:xx on xx/xx/xx your company received via facsimile specific written instructions that it was inconvenient for your company to communicate in any way other than written communications via US Mail. At xx:xx on xx/xx/xx your company communicated in violation of those specific written instructions. The next letter from your company had better contain a certified check for $1,000.00 for violating the FDCPA. Additionally, did they call your cell? Did they compu-dial? Was there a delay to connect you to a human?
There is a difference between the inconvenience clause, and ceasing communication. Inconvenience cuts off certain communications as inconvenient. Immediate, as of the second notified. A CA can not communicate via any means it knows to be inconvenient. Total C&D allows them to communicate exclusively for 1 of 3 purposes.
Jam, my exact verbiage was: All calls are inconvenient, please communicate by US Mail only. Perhaps I should've worded differently?
No, I've re-read everything and I think they did indeed violate. I did NOT do a C&D, simply said all calls were inconvenient and that only method acceptable was US mail. They called anyway. They called my cellphone but did not leave a message. I was so shocked I was setting up my recorder and by the time I went to answer it, they hung up b/c my voicemail picked it up. I have to think about how to proceed with this (fax or letter, what to say, etc). Even BETTER (and totally off topic): This got me to thinking and going through old voicemails on my phone. I found several from NCO regarding a debt they *thought* they had that was actually a misunderstanding and taken care of with OC (I have paperwork). Aren't there rules about what they can say when they leave messages b/c of 3rd party?!?! I have to go read up on THAT now. Oh, what a weekend...
[15 USC 1692c] (b) COMMUNICATION WITH THIRD PARTIES. Except as provided in section 804, without the prior consent of the consumer given directly to the debt collector, or the express permission of a court of competent jurisdiction, or as reasonably necessary to effectuate a postjudgment judicial remedy, a debt collector may not communicate, in connection with the collection of any debt, with any person other than a consumer, his attorney, a consumer reporting agency if otherwise permitted by law, the creditor, the attorney of the creditor, or the attorney of the debt collector. [15 USC 1692b] Any debt collector communicating with any person other than the consumer for the purpose of acquiring location information about the consumer shall -- (1) identify himself, state that he is confirming or correcting location information concerning the consumer, and, only if expressly requested, identify his employer; (2) not state that such consumer owes any debt;
Actually, there is a caveat. If they don't mention the attempt to collect a debt, they are violating. Courts have sided that it's more important to include the requisite notices (which would even apply to misidentified consumers) than to not reveal the collection purpose.
Jam, I hope I'm not being a bother, but this is my first time digging my heels in and fighting back. May I ask if that is pretty much how you would word your follow-up correspondence? Or should I point out the exact violation etc? I've read through some of your posts (they are very insightful and helpful) and I want to make sure I move in the right direction. Yes, they did call my cell and I believe it was compu-dial but I didn't get to the call in time and they didn't leave a message, of course.
The time should be on your incoming phone call log. If you think they called via a compu-dialer to your cell phone, I would include TCPA, and since it was after being notified that any consent to call was revoked, I would ask for treble the $500. Upping the demand to $2,500.
I would keep this one simple. The chances are, they'll continue to ignore the faxes, upping the TCPA violations.
