We and our son (same names) have been getting phone calls for a debt that is not either of ours dating back to 1998. We both have and have always had excellent credit. We stopped taking the phone calls and let them go to voice mail and delete. We have just received a "Settlement Offer" in the mail for 50% of the debt or about $2,000.00. Our son talked to one their reps once and she confessed they did not have a first name, just a first initial, and there was no SS# attached to the debt. She said all we have to do is "send a Cease and Desist letter and they will drop the case". We are concerned that it will appear on one of our credit reports. Will a simple letter stop the harrasment? The Creditor is RJM Acquisitions and the company calling is First National Collection Bureau. The name Associates Capital B is also on the Offer letter. Thank you in advance for any advice or insight received.
They did not send a letter notifying us of our right to dispute. Their letter was a a Settlement Offer with three coupons to send with a payment. The offer will be "modifed or withdrawn" if the payments are not received by the requested dates. They offered an 800 number if we wished to speak with a representative. The gave notice that we could send a written request to not be called at our place of employment.
If in fact the debt is over 7 years old, whoever's debt it was, then they should not be able to put it on your credit reports anyway. A cease and desist would prevent them from legally contacting you. The problem is, do you trust them? They appear to be very carefully tiptoeing around notifying you of your right to dispute, while appearing to be "helpfully" notifying you of other rights. Are they trying to fish for the true debtor who will just admit it is their debt, or are they likely to switch to FDCPA violating JDB mode, making threats, reaging reporting, and claiming you lost your rights? If you know something about the behavior of this particular company, you might have a clearer picture of how strong an action this warrants. Try this: First check your credit reports to see if they have made inquiries. Dispute the debt in its entirety, each of you, to get it on record. Include in your disputes that their letter was your first contact from them, that their own employee claimed the debt is from 1998, and that they had no SSN associated with the alleged debt. Send a copy of their letter attached, and keep a file copy of what you have sent. Send it CRRR, for proof of receipt. Then file a complaint with your state AG and FTC for their FDCPA violations in not sending required notifications. Include in your complaint that they have admitted to having no SSN, and only a first initial, and are apparently sending dunning letters to anyone with that last name, missing the required FDCPA notifications. If they have made inquiries, include in your complaint that fact, since if they have no idea whose debt this is, they can't have permissible purpose to pull your reports. Attach copies of your letter, and of their letter. Two paper trails. Dispute and complaint. That ought to make their day.
Did they notify you that if you didn't dispute the debt within 30 days, they would assume it was valid? What state are you in?
They did not notify us that we could dispute the debt. We are in Massachusetts. Thank you for your advice.
It is clearly first contact. In fact, if they don't know more than last name and first initial (no address, no SSN, no first name) everyone they send this letter to is first contact, regardless of whether they have sent any first contact letter to anyone in the past. When they cast their net that widely, they can't not know that their letters are going to many unsophisticated consumers, practically all of whom do NOT owe this debt. Did it say it was from a debt collector, and that any information would be used in the collection of a debt? It is illegal, and a violation of FDCPA, on it's face. It is also deceptive in implying that they intend to contact your employer if you don't contact them. They took the trouble to put that, yet they somehow neglected to tell you that as a consumer you had the more basic right to dispute a debt for which they admit to having almost no identifying information? What do they expect, that just so they can collect on an alleged debt for which they have no information, all the "J. Smiths" of the world have to contact them, or they get to start contacting everyone's employer? What's next? Pull the reports of every "J. Smith" in the world, claiming they have permissible purpose?
RJM Acquisitions is not the original creditor. It is a JDB. At over 7 years old, you would expect this anyway.
I bet there IS a SSN attached to the debt, since no bank would have loaned money, or even opened an account, without one. They may even know what it is. In this case they are willing to take money from anyone stupid enough, or scared enough, to pay it. Alternatively, there may not be one for the particular named alleged debtor, if for example, they are trying to collect from an AU on an account. They would have the name and SSN of the actual debtor, but don't or can't collect from that person, either because they can't locate them, or because they are dead, etc. In this case they are trying to collect from a party not legally liable for the debt, expecting to convince them that they are liable, on top of whether in randomly dunning people they even manage to contact the AU.
By the way, RJM purchased CAMCO's "portfolio" after they were shut down. http://www.rrstar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050917/BUSINESS02/509170311/1002 "LePetomane [the court appointed receiver] took control of CAMCO's assets on Dec. 6, 2004, after a lawsuit by the Federal Trade Commission which alleged illegal activities by CAMCO and its officers. The commission charged that up to 80 percent of CAMCO's collections were improper. " ... "CAMCO's debt portfolio was auctioned in January for $6.8 million to RJM Acquisitions LLC of Syosset, N.Y. "
Ontrack....you are an incredible source of information. We will generate several letters this weekend using your invaluable advice. Also, our son does not live with us anymore and they did have our home address. He was the first one they called. In their second call to him, they found his new address. He has not received any letters as yet or any more phone calls after their employee told him to write a Cease & Desist letter. I'll bet he gets a letter soon.
RJM appears to be buying out of statute debt, then attempting to get the debtor to reafirm it by offering a transfer to a new "credit card", or getting payment so they can claim the SOL clock was restarted. They can then For example, see this: http://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/ripoff141961.htm If someone, even a non-debtor with a poor memory, responded to one of their "offers" with one payment, they would probably claim they are contractually entitled to the balance. Of all the choices presented by First National Collection Bureau to the consumer, the possibility that they are the wrong party, don't owe the debt, and have a right to dispute it, is not even mentioned. And yet these are the most likely cases. "Obtained his new address?" Did they pull his credit report? Based on what PP? An incomplete name on an account, with no SSN, for which they have probably sent dunning letters to a bunch of addresses? You got to love any name with "Bureau" in it, it sounds so official. That's "the Credit Bureau", isn't it? At least they didn't use "Federal". Is there any fine print?
Associates Capital Bank Citi bought Associates National Bank, and Associates Capital Bank a few years ago, and appears to have sold off the non-performing debts that came with this acquisition.
"He was the first one they called. In their second call to him, they found his new address. " His first call was arguably a "dispute", although not in writing, since he he told them he had no clue what this was about, and they didn't push collection at that time. Their verbal advise, "send a C&D and they will close the file", misrepresents what he can do under the law to legally dispute. But since they have still tracked his new address, their MO is therefore apparently to follow any response, even a dispute, with their next phase of "collection". All the more reason to both dispute in writing as per FDCPA, to preserve rights, and file a complaint with your state AG, based on their FDCPA violating initial letter. Their game appears to be the usual one of deflecting consumer attempts at disputing to keep the alleged debt in play. No free turns.
My husband just called me at work. He said he received another automated call..."We have important personal information..." He had answered but hung up the phone when he heard their recording.
Then they are continuing to collect on both your husband and your son, whether at this time they even know there are two separate people.
"The gave notice that we could send a written request to not be called at our place of employment." Not only have they not notified you of your right to dispute, but their notice that you could request not to be called at work fails to mention that you could request not to be called at all, or for that matter, not be contacted further (full C&D). On top of the FDCPA violations, what would the least sophisticated consumer conclude?
To answer some of your previous questions: We have a service that is monitoring our credit report (husband misplaced wallet, found later) and they have not had any inquires. We do not trust this company and have limited information, only what you relayed and what I could find online. Thank you for all the info. Very intersting how they work. Our son stopped getting phone calls and has yet to receive a collection letter. They still call us about once a week. Their collection letter stated: â??This is an attempt to collect on a debt. Any information obtained will be used for that purpose. This is a communication from a debt collector.â? What is a JBD and an AU? Sorry, first time in this situation so acronyms are new to me but can figure out most. We donâ??t know how they obtained our sonâ??s new address but they had his phone number. Don't know how they got either. But both his and ours are in the phone book. There are places in google where you can put in a phone number and get an address AND directions to the house! We have composed a letter to the collection agency. Since the first caller gave me the amount and the original debtor, they covered two of the FDCPA requirements for validation. I quoted that they violated items 3 to 5. The FDCPA staff commentary (Dated 12/13/1988) made a suggestion (?) for an additional amendment 8 to Scetion 809. It reads: 8. Effect of including proof with first notice. A debt collector must verify a disputed debt even if he has included proof of the debt with the first communication, because the section is intended to assist the consumer when a debt collector inadvertently contacts the {53 Fed Reg. 50109} wrong consumer at the start of his collection efforts. I can't find if this has become law or if contacting the wrong party is a violation somewhere else in the FDCPA. Do you know? Thank you for all your help.......
"We have composed a letter to the collection agency. Since the first caller gave me the amount and the original debtor, they covered two of the FDCPA requirements for validation. I quoted that they violated items 3 to 5." You are being too nice. You know the debt is not yours, stop taking their side. That is what they count on: being able to dunn a lot of people who MIGHT be, but are not LIKELY to be, the "debtor" until they find one they can intimidate into paying, with NO consequences for all the people they hassle and all the time they waste. Any information they sent you with their dunning letter did NOT provide a response to your letter sent later to dispute the debt. The information they provided was from their own records, which may be erroneous, may have been "corrected" to match what they thought would get a response, may have been passed around from CA to CA, and who knows what part of it is correct, up to date, complete, etc? The purpose of disputing the debt under FDCPA is to deal with errors in identifying the correct debtor, as well as errors in determining the correct amount of the debt due. That is why the CA must obtain this information directly from the original creditor, not just their own records. If the debt is not yours, you dispute it, asking for the sort of information that would correctly identify the original creditor, original account number, debtor name and original billing address, dates of service, etc. that would allow you to show it is not your debt. After providing that, you will either be able to convince them that you are not the debtor, or you will know that if you need to go to court, the information they have will show the debt is not yours, so you are likely to take that action and prevail should they continue to harass or damage you. You may send them a Cease and Desist knowing the debt is not yours. The reason for specifically requesting the name of the original creditor, and the original amount of the debt, along with all the other information you might request to determine that the debt is not yours, is that you want the CA to specifically obtain this information from the original creditor, giving them the opportunity to determine that you are not the correct consumer. If they just parrot back their own records in response to your dispute, you may have to go to court, and use discovery to force them to either provide the information needed to show it is not your account, or have to admit that what they provided was NOT from the original creditor, in which case you would claim that their sending it in response to your FDCPA dispute was "deceptive".
