Sometimes my mother show up unavailable, and sometime shows her name...my wife refuses to answer "unavailable"... I'm afraid it is somebody I really want to talk to...
Erica: Again! It is illegal to force the debtor to pay to contact or speak to the collector. While that law (FDCPA) was written prior to the advent of the cellphone, the rule would still apply to cellphone equally for the simple reason that some people do have to pay for both incoming and outgong calls on cellphones. Furthermore, how do you really know that her name is Diana as she claimed? One should always demand the answer to that question from a collector because collection agencies and creditors alike often have their help use false first names for their personal protection. What they fal to realize in doing so is that they place their help in grave danger of spending a few years in Federal prison because it is illegal to use any false name or business name in the process of collecting a debt. (FDCPA) So while cellphones are not specifically named in FDCPA, it is still illegal for a collector to force the creditor to pay for contacting creditor. That should obviously be upheld if and when it is taken to court as it most likely will be someday if in fact such a judicial ruling has not already been made somewhere regarding the matter of cellphones. Someone also mentioned the statute of limitations and it's applicability to this type of situation in this same thread. The SOL is only valid in a court of law if argued by the defendant before the court. If the defendant does not appear and make affirmative defense using SOL then SOL affords no real protection at all. The collector can legally attempt collection right up to the time the debtor is stone cold dead and beyond. Now then, as most folks know quite well, I am not an attorney so if an attorney pops in here and says I am wrong, then I probably am. But until such time as some qualified person can show me where I am wrong and cite the relevant law proving me wrong, then I will hold to my belief.
They may be able to "SKATE" around it , because MANY cell phone contracts have so many minutes, that you CAN'T use, if they did or didn't call, you would still have TONS of unused minutes... JUST A THOUGHT... IT WOULD BE DIFFERENT IF YOU USED A "CALLING CARD" CELL PHONE...
George: If you did take it to court, it would be a matter of did or did it not cost the plaintiff. If it cost the plaintiff nothing, he would have an awful hard time finding an attorney dumb enough to take the case.
There is no law to violate for attempting to collect a debt after the SOL expires. They can hound you for the rest of your life. When the SOL for a debt expires, it give you the defendant a "perfect defense" against a lawsuit filed against you for this debt. This does not mean it is illegal or wrong for the plaintiff to file the suit. And if you as the defendant fail to respond, or fail to bring up the SOL as a defense, the plaintiff will win a judgement. Once that is done, they can then use tools such as leins and wage garnishments against you. Bottom feeding CA's that buy old debts can often collect money on them from people who don't know how to defend themselves. Or even better. They buy an old debt, quietly file suit, fail to properly serve you, and they win a default judgement. Next thing you know, someone is legally taking money out of your paycheck and your account. At this point you are on the defensive and have to go to court, prove that you were not properly served, and convince a judge to vacate the judgement. Good luck trying to get that money back that the CA took from you. You may have to counter sue them and attempt to collect. If you think they were bastards at the collection game, see how they are as a defendent.
MP40 I agree with what you are saying somewhat. Unfortunately, you must remember that collection agencies put themselves in harms way on purpose. They do this in order to make "MONEY". They are not the original creditor. If the original creditor was to call and bug you for the money, that would make a lot more sense. Instead, they charge it off and use it as a write off on their taxes and claim it on their insurance. They still benifit somehow. Then the bottom feeding collection agency decides that they can make a profit, so they try to collect on a debt that has been somewhat satisfied allready. Technically, you are responsible for any taxes on the income that you recieved from not paying the debt. Any debts that are used as a write off by a company are considered income by the debtor. You then become liable for those taxes,. It is all a double whammy if you ask me. NOT FAIR!!!
I see your point totally and thanks for the clarification. You are absolutely right. It would make a difference if it was the original creditor as opposed to collection agency. I didn't take that into consideration. Thanks.....now I understand. There is a lot of UNFAIRNESS in the credit world.
I can see where folks are going with this, but I dont see that it is illegal to call a debtor on a cell phone under the law. When we answer our phones, we are agreeing to any charges incurred. This is done by our own free will and is really no different than using a payphone. The problem is that they have your cellphone # in the first place. These are private #s. How in the hell did they get it. If they used illegal means with your provider, I would be pretty ticked off. The cell phone # doesnt shown up on reports. Unless, one of your creditors that has the # gave it to the collector, I cant imagine how else they got it. THESE #S are not published for this very reason(IT costs us money). I would change my #....
I understand what you are saying about answering the call, But what the hell do I have caller Id for if they are going to block the calls? that makes no sense. Therefore, I DO NOT agree to answer the phone if the caller blocks the phone call. Some providers charge you if the phone rings and you DON'T answer it.
Of course there is. That's exactly why - in a cardholder's agreement - it states that if you use the card, you authorize the original creditor to use any means necessary (under the law) to get their money. Included in this is the right to give the account to an outside agency for collection of the debt. It is both legitimate and legal.
It Does-butt it don.t mean they are allowed to use any high handed means they feel like to get the info.QUOTE]Originally posted by MP$40 I thought that the disclaimer entitled them to use any info that they receive to collect the debt???
Simple The 3 didget exchange # is different. How would they know this is your cellphone number? [/QUOTE]
Erica, If my provider charged me for an unanswered call, I would complain and then take my business elsewhere. In fact, with every provider I've had, the first minute of an incoming call is free. This is to take care of charges for things like wrong numbers and unsolicted calls I would imagine.
This is a poor set up:Chang it to where you have two years to get your money- after that its over period . ==================================== ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
