I recorded a conversation with this CA. He got rather upset when I began citing FDCPA violations to him. I did not refuse to pay or accept any liability for the debt, but he said he would not settle the debt with me, I owed them several thousand dollars and he would only speak to an attorney at this point! If he (the CA) does not wish to speak to me further, isn't the CA required to remove the debt from my CR? They do not own the debt at this point, they are only assigned to collect it.
Then why not just make him a written settlement offer, including a payment schedule you can stick with? They have to put any refusal responses into writing, which they won't want to do.
Is it possible to talk with the OC (in writing) Send a letter to the OC, explaining that you want to work out this situation, however, their agent, ______ is refusing to talk to you. And ______ said he would refuse to talk to you, when you tried to exercise your rights under Federal Law, and that they can be held liable for their agents refusal to comply with Federal Law. You want to emphasize, that you want to resolve this situation reasonably, however they need to get their agent in line, or fire them. Keep in mind, its false & misleading for them to imply that if the account is transferred to anyone from the CA (including the original creditor), that you are subject to any activities prohibited by the FDCPA.
His refusal to speak to anyone but an attorney is pure bluster. It is none of their business whether you hire an attorney. Do all further communication in writing, CRRR.
WOW---- what a threat. He won't speak to you. Most people would have said "Thank God, and goodbye". Don't you see this is a way of trying to scare you - make you think this matter is so serious that a non-attorney bill collector who maybe graduated High School will only talk to an attorney about this debt instead of the person who owes it and is trying to make arrangements to pay it. Whether he owns the debt or not is irrelevant and he is not required to remove it from yoiur CRA file (yet). The CA has FDCPA violations? He only wants to talk to an attorney? "That can be arranged, sweet cheeks, just give me an address to serve the summons at."
lol I wonder what the Ca response would be to the summons I bet then they would want to talk to you to avoid litigation and offer a settlement. oh 2 bad I have an attorney now you cant talk to Me either wow how the tables can get turned. Im willing to bet they would rather open mouth insert foot. anyway I would ck the BBB reliability report where this ca is located find out who is listed as the ceo or president in charge and send them a CMRRR or fax and explain your position this may get results better yet file a complaint with the BBB this may get their attention as well. the larger the paper trail you have the better position you will be in if you go to court
Re: Re: CA refuses to speak to me The CA is referring to his own attorney not the posters. I think you misread the post. ><- <>- ><- <> ~~~ ><- <>- ><-
Re: Re: Re: CA refuses to speak to me I believe that a CA threatening to sue without actually intending to sue is a violation in itself. If you do not receive a summons then yhey should receive one from you.
I think that it is strange that a CA would say that. I am a legal assistant working for a collection attorneys and I tell people that we can not speak with them only if they are NOT the debtor of the account. By law we can only speak to the person who the debt belongs to because we are a third party collector. I agree that you should send something in writing and this will start a paper trail of evidence if needed in the future. Then you will have proof that you attempted to resolve the matter but the CA has been uncooperative. Personally, I would send it to the OC and cc the CA. This is just my opinion.
Re: Re: Re: CA refuses to speak to me I don't think so. If the CA wants to talk to their own attorney, they can do it any time they want. this was an attempt to insert such urgency into the matter "that only your attorney can handle it now."
1* wheaty said the CA got rather upset when I began citing FDCPA violations to him. he said he would only speak to an attorney at this point! ><- <>- ><- <> ~~~ ><- <>- ><- <> ><- <>- ><- <> ~~~ ><- <>- ><- <> 1*Think the CA got so shook up with this he figured he better talk to his attorney about defending himself against the violations leveled at him by wheaty The CA didn't want to talk anymore to wheaty for fear of getting in deeper
we all wish the ca's would refuse to speak to us, can you make them ALL shut up? have to admit you have a very unique problem!
Let me shed some light )) After I asked him to send proof of the contract that states what I owe, and advising him of FDCPA violations of not sending initial letter at al and some subsequent letters without listing miranda rights, He said "Have your attorney contact me. At this point, you are due for almost 5k, I am not taking it off your credit, I am not giving you a settlement, and have your attorney contact us because we refuse to deal with you in the future". Exact words, recorded. It's correct the CA directly advised to have my attorney contact them, assuming that perhaps, I already have one and this is why I possess the ability to inform him of violations. My reason for the call was to follow up my letter to CRAs (they verified) and DV letter to the CA, in attempt to get him to commit more violations (can't forget the handy recorder). When they only sent copies of supposed debt (no mini-statement) and no contract, didn't answer why they were not bonded or did not send FULL disclosure of debt (I directly reuested in writing), including fees, extra charges, etc., as requested, he said, "you did not ask for the contract" and after asking why he did not disclose fees or contract "if you stop talking, I'll break down those fees and fax you the contract". Then he said "you have no proof you sent the letter requesting this". Isn't it a violation if I ask for those things, which are relevant to FDCPA he must disclose them the first time, not when I have to ask him a second time (if he is going to send a response)? Isn't he admitting indirectly he did not send the proper validation? He did say "Do you want to be sued?" Can he do that? Unfortunately, this part I did not have recorded but I wrote down some of the quotes. I guess I can probably use it with some of the other statements I do have recorded, to backup my claims to a judge. That's what I felt as well happened, you are right! I may get an attorney, but not for me to pay to delete! butch, this is my thoughts as well, but can you kindly show some case law that backs this up? Since they are assigned the debt and are being 'paid' to get the money from me, they have no authority to cease communications unless the OC advised them to not settle. I haven't refused to settle, but only asked for full validation (which he did not provide even after the fax). During the conv, the CA offered me a settlement for $200 less than the debt in exchange for what he calls "reported in error" (I call it extortion), but the offer was only good until the following day! "After that", he said "it's not coming off your credit until time itself removes it. I refuse to take it off your report unless this is taken care of by tomorrow". Not sure if past SOL, NJ says 6 years for notes payable at a definite time, thought originally it may not be promissary note (it's also showing to be "installment contract" but it has fixed payment schedule (monthly) but different in that no interest being added as part of contract. Have to assume it's a legal contract and would fall under 6-year NJ statute. (last payment was made 3/99) Diputed with CRA (verified name and SSN), CA, as above did not IMHO properly validate until they were requested to several times (full disclosure of debt, mirnada statements, etc. were not provided in paper trails). I'm still not sure if the have fully validated as per FCDCPA, I'm a bit fuzzy there.
sounds like you are still within the SOL, I personally would let sleeping dogs lie for another year until the SOL runs out. by you pursuing them now it could provoke them in filing suit. you said they verified the acct with the CRA and that they have not sent you proper validation.( this is a violation ) ( BUT ) they could send you validation and if they do now what are you prepared to do make a settlement offer that they refuse to accept? unless you rack up more violations and get some leverage I would leave it alone for a bit, if you get violations that you can PROVE other than a recording I say then gather your evidence and send an ITS letter they may back down or fight it another thing is to file a complaint with the BBB if you know they dont have proof of the debt this may get them to delete . or work out a settlement. there is alot of ifs in this story so I would recommend getting legal advise froman attorney check out a web site called lawguru.com you can ask an attorney from your state a question. i hope this helps you. good luck and keep us posted
What date was this phone call? There is a chance you could bearly wait out their SOL, and still get the $5K in ChaChing which he admitted in the call that his company owes you... Talk about having your cake, and eatting it too... About April 2005 the account should hit the SOL. (the date the first payment was missed after the 3/99 payment. but you may want to allow a little bit extra time as a CYA.) If you send them a time-barred notice on the day after the SOL ceases, and serve them in your local court for the $5,000.00 under the FDCPA (WHICH IS THE AMOUNT THAT HE ADMITTED TO ON TAPE.) You may even be able to get the FDCPA out of the picture, and get the judge to view the phone call as an oral contract for his company to pay you $5K...
Re: Re: CA refuses to speak to me After I asked him to send proof of the contract that states what I owe, and advising him of FDCPA violations of not sending initial letter at al and some subsequent letters without listing miranda rights, He said "Have your attorney contact me. At this point, you are due for almost 5k, I am not taking it off your credit, I am not giving you a settlement, and have your attorney contact us because we refuse to deal with you in the future". Exact words, recorded. It's correct the CA directly advised to have my attorney contact them, assuming that perhaps, I already have one and this is why I possess the ability to inform him of violations. ************************************** I think jam you misread the post, the CA was relating that he owed 5K not that 5k was due to him. for violations. since he is still within the SOL the best thing he could do is go after the violations to get the debt deleted and maybe extra $. contact the BBB where the Ca is located first pull the reliability report then file a complaint, don't foeget to dispute the acct with the CRA now as well! if your state requires the CA to be lisc & bonded and you can prove they are not write them a letter stating this and show them that if they do not delete the acct immediately you will report their violations to the Attorney Generals office and file suit against them. only do this if you know you have violations you can prove otherwise it can backfire on you.
Re: Re: CA refuses to speak to me "At this point, you are due for almost 5k" This is how I would read the quote. CA: "At this point, you (being the consumer) are due for almost 5K." were the CA's exact words, the CA would be, me or we, not you... unless the CA was Bob Dole... The only person who notably put himself in the third person... This sentence was in direct response to the outlining of the FDCPA violations, so contextually it fits. If he was saying you owe us, or our client almost 5k, that would be different, but he says you are due... At least that is how someone who speaks English would phrase it...
