I posted here a little while ago about a CA called NCC calling me about a $400 collection account from about 10 years ago. They say I owed this money about 10 years ago, and placed in collections about a year ago. I sent a validation letter about 2 weeks ago, also saying I do not want to receive calls and I do not want to be contacted except for the validation I've asked for. I never even received so much as a notice prior to them starting to call me... and they also admitted they don't have my address. I sent the letter CRRR and got the receipt back showing that it was received and signed for. As of yesterday however, I've started receiving calls again. Not only are they calling me, but they're saying that they've added an entry on my credit report (which I know they can't legally do). I checked my credit reports, and there are no collections items on there as expected. The validation request I sent said if I received calls from them, I'd sue for harrassment. Do I have legal grounds to sue now? I'm really ticked off especially since this idiot I got on the phone was calling me names and saying any letter I may have sent is crap, and that they don't have to prove anything.
Are these who you are dealing with? http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2003/05/nccfinal.htm http://www.ftc.gov/os/caselist/checkinvestors/050728opcheckenforcement.pdf "...Plaintiff FTC alleges that for every purported NSF check, defendants demand immediate payment of a total sum that equals the face value of the NSF check plus an additional fee of either $125.00 or $130.00, depending on when defendants began collecting on the account. (See e.g., Plaintiffââ?¬â?¢s Decl.4, Ã?¶ 6; Decl. 2, Ã?¶ 2; Decl. 4, Ã?¶ 8). However, the collection letters do not identify the face value of the NSF check and the additional charge but, rather, merely set forth the total ââ?¬Å?amount due.ââ?¬Â (See e.g., Plaintiffââ?¬â?¢s Decl. 1, Exh. 2; Decl. 2, Exh. 2; Decl. 4. Exh. 1). Defendants do not even acknowledge that they are collecting additional charges. (See, e.g., Plaintiffââ?¬â?¢s Decl. 3, Ã?¶ 17; Decl. 8, Ã?¶ 3; Decl. 9, Ã?¶ 6). To extract full payment, defendants threaten consumers with arrest, criminal prosecution and civil actions. (See, e.g., Plaintiffââ?¬â?¢s Decl. 1, Ã?¶Ã?¶ 6, 8; Decl. 3, Ã?¶ 2; Decl. 5, Ã?¶Ã?¶ 3, 8, 11). Defendants make these threats through collections letters and abusive and harassing telephone calls to the check writers and their family members. (See generally, Plaintiffââ?¬â?¢s Decls. 1-3, 5-17, 19, 21, 23). Plaintiff asserts that, generally, defendants assail consumers for six months or longer to collect the full amount demanded. Consumers who try to assert their rights under the FDCA to dispute or obtain verification of their purported debts are met with further abuse and threats. (See e.g., Plaintiffââ?¬â?¢s Decl. 7, Ã?¶Ã?¶ 13, 15; Decl. 2, Ã?¶ 12; Decl. 3, Ã?¶ 11). Plaintiff notes that a number of check writers from whom defendants sought payment did not even owe the underlying NSF check amount claimed by defendants. (Plaintiffââ?¬â?¢s Decl. 1, Ã?¶Ã?¶ 2-4; Decl. 2, Ã?¶ 6; Decl. 3, Ã?¶ 6; Decl. 16, Ã?¶ 2). Plaintiff asserts that since commencing operations in 1995, defendants have collected at least $10.2 million from 42,100 consumers through practices that violate the FDCPA and Section 5 of the FTCA. (Plaintiffââ?¬â?¢s Decl. 28, Ã?¶Ã?¶ 10, 12, Exh. 7). Defendants have ignored cease and desist orders issued by at least six states, (Plaintiffââ?¬â?¢s Decl. 27, Exh. 8; Decl. 28, Exhs. 9-12; Decl. 30, Exh. 4), ignored or responded dismissively to law enforcement and regulatory authorities in at least 28 states, (Plaintiffââ?¬â?¢s Decl. 27, Ã?¶Ã?¶ 10-16, Exhs. 3-4, 14-41; Decl. 28, Exh. 9 at 2-6, 12-15, 20-21, Exh. 10 at 4; Decl. 30, Ã?¶Ã?¶ Exh. 1 at 3-4, Exh. 3 at 2; Decl. 32, Ã?¶ 4), and defaulted on judgments obtained by individual consumers whose suits have alleged abusive collection practices. (Plaintiffââ?¬â?¢s Decl. 33, Ã?¶Ã?¶ 4-5, Exh. 2). Defendants are not licensed as a collection agency in any state, yet collect payments in all 50 states, including states that bar collection by unlicensed agencies. (Plaintiffââ?¬â?¢s Decl. 27, Ã?¶ 25, Exhs. 10, 12, 14, 17, 18, 23, 27; Decl. 28, Ã?¶Ã?¶ 30-31, Exhs. 9, 11, 12, 20; Decl. 29, Exh. 1 at 1; Decl. 30). Plaintiff FTC alleges that the above-outlined practices violate numerous provisions of the FDCPA and the FTCA and requests that the Court grant summary judgment and issue a permanent injunction against defendants. Specifically, the FTC seeks a permanent injunction and order that: (1) prohibits defendants from engaging in debt collection activities; (2) prohibits defendants from making certain misrepresentations; (3) requires defendants to pay consumer redress; and (4) enables the FTC to monitor defendantsââ?¬â?¢ compliance with a final order...."
They claim to be a typical collection agency, but they also purchase debt. It would appear they purchase out of statute junk debt. What do they claim the debt is for? Who is the OC? Is it even possible you had an account with that OC 10 years ago, let alone an unpaid one? They are in PA. Are you in PA? If this debt was valid, what would be the SOL? The PA Attorney General does appear to respond to FDCPA complaints. You can search his site for cases. NCC appears to be a BBB member, and appears to respond to BBB complaints.
