Cap 1 trying to revive old debts

Discussion in 'Credit Talk' started by WALLST, Aug 15, 2001.


    WALLST Well-Known Member

    I've gotten 3 of these öffers"from Cap 1

    From the College of Journalism, Capital News Service on, Wednesday, April
    11, 2001.

    ^CNS-Debt Owed,410<
    ^Judge Rejects Claim That Collection Agency's Letter on Old Debt Was
    ^Capital News Service=

    WASHINGTON - Collection agencies can invite people to pay off an old
    debt without running afoul of federal law, even if the debtors no longer
    have a legal obligation to pay it off, a federal judge has ruled.
    Denita J. Wallace of Baltimore claimed the notice she received from
    Capital One Bank last April tried to get her to pay off an old $1,681.27
    debt, without pointing out that she was not legally obligated to pay
    anymore, according to her attorney.
    Wallace said that was a violation of the Federal Debt Collection
    Practices Act, which says a "debt collector may not use a false,
    deceptive, or misleading representation or meanings in connection with
    the collection of a debt."
    But U.S. District Judge J. Frederick Motz rejected that argument. He
    ruled Friday that while Capital One Bank did not disclose the fact that
    the debt's statute of limitations had run out, it did not violate the
    collections practices act.
    "No violation of the FDCPA occurs solely because a debt validation
    notice silent on the time-bar issue is sent to the debtor," Motz wrote in
    his ruling. He said it would also have to be shown that "a debt collector
    has engaged in a course of conduct that tricks a debtor into waiving his
    legal right to assert a limitations defense."
    But Wallace's attorney, Randolph Bragg, said he believes collection
    agencies prey off individuals who are not as "suspicious" as Wallace was
    when she received her collection notice. He said he "deals with cases
    like this all the time."
    "We believed that hundreds, maybe thousands of people were getting
    tricked," said Bragg. "I'm disappointed in the decision because I think
    the omission of the facts deceives the consumers."
    Bragg said the notice is misleading because, if Wallace had actually
    decided to pay off some of the debt out of a moral obligation she may have
    felt, she would have revived the entire debt. That would have given
    Capital One Bank the opportunity to sue her for the entire amount of the
    A spokesman for Capital One Bank declined to make any official
    comments regarding the case.
    Wallace could not be reached for comment Wednesday afternoon.
    Bragg said it is a common practice for banks such as Capital One to
    purchase expired debts for a small fraction of the full debt in order to
    try to get the debtor to pay it off.
    -30- CNS 04-11-01
  2. bbauer

    bbauer Banned

    Attorney Bragg don't have too much to brag about does he?

    As many attorneys do, he got the right answer to the wrong question asked of the wrong judge in the wrong venue and at the wrong time.

    Happens every time one does that.
  3. aigle

    aigle Well-Known Member

    Thanks for posting the interesting story about the crooks at Capital One. They are not merely 'stingy,' they do not give people the credit they deserve based on their current credit reports. I have closed out my account and I will never accept a card offer from Capital One again.

    WALLST Well-Known Member


    And he told me that practice was illegal, as I have received those offers, they have also reported one of them(a Citibank charge off from 96) on my Transunion report and reaged it to opened 10/2000
    closed 11/2000, when I called them on it they said it was Transunions fault, yada yada. I will deal with them in due time. C1 will not get away from this one.

Share This Page