Cross Country Bank (my heroes) did this nasty thing all the time. EVERY time you called the number you called from became your home number. So, I use my b-friend's cell one day and call to verify a payment was received. Some time in the future when I called and spoke with a rep she asked me to verify my home number. The one I gave didn't match. She was new and read what they back to me. It was the b-friend's cell number. What a bunch of shits. . .
Need a little help here marci Something I need a little help understanding here, marci. You posted ----------------------------- 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. marci -------------------------- While I must agree that in the event that a contract has a transfer clause in it and is signed by both the debtor and the collector then it can be transferred to a 3rd party. In most states, it is legally clear that absent a transfer clause, a contract is not transferrable to any 3rd party. Texas and many other states are quite clear on that and there are multitudes of court cases attesting to that fact. But even so, although the creditor may be within his rights to transfer, sell or otherwise dispose of the contract, what law states that in the event of such transfer the debtor has any obligation to pay the party of the third part? How is it that the constitutional prohibition against such obligation to pay 3rd parties without written consent of the debtor has been abrogated? The constitution is the supreme law of the land and any law which would invalidate the constitutional protections afforded by that document are automatically null and void and of no legal consequence.
In COLLETION HELL, here is what happens, most collectors have an inside contact. When they skip trace (i.e. lookfor you), they "network" together and share information about you. Me with all the derogs used to skip trace part time. That's how I found out how they find you.
Kittw1: In COLLETION HELL, here is what happens, most collectors have an inside contact. When they skip trace (i.e. lookfor you), they "network" together and share information about you. Me with all the derogs used to skip trace part time. That's how I found out how they find you. --------------------------- That plus I am sure they have other ways as well. Once they find me, I make darn sure they then have the problem of figuring out what to do with me and how to get me off their backs. Maybe I ought to change my handle to TARBABY. LOL
Re: Need a little help here marci You ask good questions. I don't know which CC companies have transfer clauses - I suspect most do (at least all of my agreements state that) - but even if they are initially not included I'd think that they can be added at any time, and implicitly agreed upon if the person continues use of the card. Re the constitutionality of debt transfers sans debtor written consent, that's a good point. But until it is addressed in a supreme court somewhere, a person can only assume that if he or she enters a debt contract that has a transfer clause, he or she will be subject to a collection agency if there is a default. So, if it's protected by contract law - then I'd say it's legitimate and legal.
Re: Need a little help here marci Well what is legal about trying to collect on a debt that has been satisified to the creditor?? XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Re: Need a little help here marci Obviously nothing, lb, but who in this thread *was* talking about a collection agency's right to collect on a debt already paid to the creditor? I certainly wasn't.
Re: Need a little help here marci I don't know which CC companies have transfer clauses - I suspect most do (at least all of my agreements state that) - I would hazard a guess that all CC companies have transfer clauses in their contracts or terms of use which is basically the same thing. ------------------------------- but even if they are initially not included I'd think that they can be added at any time, and implicitly agreed upon if the person continues use of the card. Provided that they are notified of the change and what signifies acceptance, that may well be true. In any other type of contract then it cannot be changed without expressly re-writing the contract. If the contract is changed in any way, shape or form without written consent of both parties, the contract is immediately null and void. Re the constitutionality of debt transfers sans debtor written consent, that's a good point. But until it is addressed in a supreme court somewhere, --- It already has been many times over. It is illegal. It is also illegal to force or attempt to force a person into a contract with any 3rd party without his prior knowledge and consent. ---------- a person can only assume that if he or she enters a debt contract that has a transfer clause, he or she will be subject to a collection agency if there is a default. So, if it's protected by contract law - then I'd say it's legitimate and legal. Well, marci, that is precisely the question I asked you in the first place. While a creditor may have the right to dispose of his chattels as he sees fit, how does his decision obligate the debtor? We do know for fact that absent lawful clause in the original contract specifically providing for transfer of the contract the document becomes immediately null and void upon it's transfer to a 3rd party. However, the question of what law specifically obligates the party of the second part to pay party of the 3rd part? Right to transfer does not necessarily equate to obligation of 2nd party to the 3rd party. An illustration might be that just because you put hot water in the bathtub does not obligate your husband to immediately jump in and take a bath although that might have been your intention. In that silly example, you are the party of the first part, your husband is the party of the second part, the tub is the party of the 3rd part and the hot water is the contract you transferred to party of the 3rd part. marci
Re: Need a little help here marci The part that confuses me in all these third party transfers or assigment clauses, is that they never name the third party. How can you have a third party if they are not named? How can someone agree to do business with someone that is not even known at the time of signing a contract? It just doesn't make sense to me..
Signing blank checks The part that confuses me in all these third party transfers or assigment clauses, is that they never name the third party. How can you have a third party if they are not named? How can someone agree to do business with someone that is not even known at the time of signing a contract? It just doesn't make sense to me.. ----------------------- In a sense, it's about like signing a blank check. Anybody can fill in anything they want to and cash it. Relating that to the current subject, they can then assign it to anybody they want to at any time. But you may very well not have agreed to do business with any third party, but rather only have agreed to let them transfer to anybody they choose. Common sense tells us that if you agreed to let them transfer to any third party of their choice then you also agreed to pay that third party. I am not saying that I know the actual answer to that question. Au Contrare What I am actually saying or asking is this: Legally speaking, does the obligation also transfer? And the only proper answer is with case cites where this has been ruled on by something other than a court of inferior jurisdiction. Our opinions are about like eyes. Everybody has a couple. Even an opinion of a qualified attorney is not sufficient. Let the courts rule on this as I am certain that they have done time and time again. This forum is not the only place that this question is being asked and so far, I have seen no case cites which clarify this issue. I have heard some say that the constitution protects against such things, I have heard a lot of theories on this same subject, but I have seen no definitive answers. Only more theories. I'm not bringing this up to bug Marci because I am well aware that it is unlikely that she has a definitive answer. Her post simply gave me the opportunity to lay the question before the forum and see if anyone actually knows of any such case cites as would be required to answer the question once and for all.
Re: Need a little help here marci Reply to Bills post While a creditor may have the right to dispose of his chattels as he sees fit, how does his decision obligate the debtor? This is what i was saying on one of my post on the topic. We do know for fact that absent lawful clause in the original contract specifically providing for transfer of the contract the document becomes immediately null and void upon it's transfer to a 3rd party. However, the question of what law specifically obligates the party of the second part to pay party of the 3rd part? Right to transfer does not necessarily equate to obligation of 2nd party to the 3rd party. That what i stated in another post on the subject.
Re: Signing blank checks Why would you be agreeing to pay a 3rd.party anyything when the transfer pays the orginal creditor and cancels the debt.?
Re: Signing blank checks You do have your point, Mr. Brown. But can you back it up with a case cite or two? Something concrete that can be relied upon? If not, please elaborate a bit and maybe we can help you find something in a court decision or two.
Re: Signing blank checks Example I have a loan with bank a the balance is 10000. I offer to settle for 8000.Bank a accepts my offer . Bank As' acceptance of the 8000 creates a new agreement which voids the old contract . Because of the new contract i have no obligation to the old 10000 contract.
Re: Signing blank checks What I'm saying is if bank a accepts less than the orignal balance it discharges me from the old contract. It makes no difference who they accept the lesser amount from.
Re: Signing blank checks Mr. Brown Well, Mr. Brown, it's now fairly obvious that you are coming from somewhere with this. I think I know what you are leading up to, but I'd rather be sure, so bring it on. If you are leading up to what I think you are, you may find yourself preaching to the choir. But that's OK. Been there, done that before too.
Re: Signing blank checks The old contract was canceled out by the new agreement.The new agreement was paid in full. What obligations are left on either one to pass on to another party?
