Please answer . Which law relates to the following argument? Collection Agency pulls hard inquiry on old debt. I know somewhere I read and have misplaced my notes concerning this issue. There was an FTC opinion letter or something equivalent tieing the fact that a debt collector pulled a hard inquiry on a person that they have a legally uncollectible debt with. Unless a person is doing business with, applies for credit with, or has a collectible debt with a company, etc. When a debt collector pulls a hard inquiry on a person, gaining access to and obtaining a person's personal credit information, it is considered CONTINUED COLLECTION ACTIVITY by a debt collector. I need some legal "back-up" for this accusation on my behalf that I can use in court. Thanks for the help. Keller
Lizardking, Mindcrime, Doc, Wolverine, Whyspers, LKH, George, ANYONE. . .Please help. I am trying to finish up my complaint so that I can get it filed tomorrow and need some last minute questions answered. Thanks, Keller
Keller, You might have to do a couple of separate 'word' searches, but the Wollman letter talks about continued collection activity.
I think rule 604 cover permissable purpose for pulling credit reports. Here is the link to the FCRA http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/fcra.htm The cass letter does discuss continued collection activity. http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/fdcpa/letters/cass.htm What do you mean by legally uncollectable debt?
Keller, There is a post entitled "collection agency inquiry" that talks about your issue. I'm sorry I'm not computer savvy enough to put a link to the post in here for you, but when your search results come back, you'll see it. Hope it helps.
Thanks for coming to my rescue!!!! LKH, "legally" uncollectible, by that, I meant that the Statute of Limitations in my state is 4 years. It has been 6 to 7 years and they cannot legally come after me for the debt. They can "try" and continue sending me letters and "try" to collect, but they wouldn't have a chance in court due me being able to use "Absolute Defense". I really appreciate your replies!!! I may have a couple of other questions that relate to my complaint before the evening is over!
Keller, I sent you a couple of opinion letters. One was Wollman. Is that the one that you are talking about? Aren't you in Htown? Where did you get the 4 year "legally uncollectable" SOL? I would like to put it in my folder. How's your case coming? The one I was working on dropped both collections. I have another that I still may end up with. Please, keep us posted step by step. Charlie
Charlie, congratulations on the deleted collections. I was busy working on my complaint and checking the board, too. The SOL in Texas is 4 years. I am suing RMA, on hubby's behalf. After getting some advice from the board, I am also listing myself as Plaintiff, since what RMA has done affects me, too. I had to figure out something because hubby doesn't know the "first" thing about any of this and I couldn't send him to court. I have gotten so many violations on them, I almost would like to take it to a higher court. This has been so time consuming!! Even if they delete, I am still suing. Writing this complaint has been my nemesis!! As far as I'm concerned, the hard part is over with. I definitely have a case and they have broken so many laws, regardless of whether or not they delete or not. Since I have had to spend so-o-o much time on this, I am going to get compensated! I figure, what's another day to go to court? I've already spent 3 months on this! Thanks for the letters. I believe I have the Wollman letter and the Cass letter. I also have the entire appeal from the Spears case if anyone wants it. It has some good "stuff" in it. I have researched so much! My office looks like an attorney lives here. I hope all goes well with this. We'll see what happens. Keller
Keller, It sounds like your armed and ready for bear. I would like to have the Spears letter for my "library". I have been working on a RMA deal over the weekend. I just hope that I don't have the problems that you are having. When are you going to court? Good luck, and keep us posted. Charlie
Charlie, it looks like I will file today or tomorrow on RMA. I'll keep you posted. You do the same. Keller
Charlie I was going to email you and tell you that I'd fax over the Spears case for your records. If you will email me with your fax number, I'll be happy to do that. It is 11 pages long, but it is "FULL" of good stuff, for 'back-up' in court Keller
Now I never really got into the SOL stuff, except for briefly just to make sure a company couldn't file a cross claim when I sued them, but I have a question (not something I really need to know, but curious)... Can't they attempt collection for as long as they want, but they can't sue you over it, garnish wages, obtain a judgment or report it on your credit report? For some reason I was thinking they could still try to collect forever as far as sending a letter or making a phone call. This is probably wrong and I'm not sure where I got this. Maybe I'm confusing it with a judgment. Sorry I couldn't help OP...I've not had to deal with collection inquiries. L
Whyspers, you are right. They can "try" to collect it but they have no legal power to collect it. This was my basis for an arguement concerning them pulling a "hard inquiry" on my credit report. Two things: (1) Since the SOL has expired, the collection is "technically" uncollectible as far as them trying to collect it through the court system because of "Absolute Defense". With this being said, I would say that they have Misrepresented the legal status of the debt. FDCPA § 807. False or misleading representations - A debt collector cannot use any false, deceptive, or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt; without limiting the general application of the foregoing, the following conduct is a violation of this section2) The false representation of --(A) the character, amount, or legal status of any debt; or (10) The use of any false representation or deceptive means to collect or attempt to collect any debt or to obtain information concering a consumer. ***BINGO!!!*** They pulled a "hard inquiry". Gee, that sounds as if the FTC would regard that as CONTINUED COLLECTION ACTIVITY. . .or, at the very least, something similar. Ya think? (2)Inquiries for non-permissible purposes FCRA § 616. Civil liability for willful noncompliance (B) in the case of liability of a natural person for obtaining a consumer report under false pretenses or knowingly without permissible purpose, actual damages sustained by the consumer as a result of the failure or $1,000, whichever is greater; (2) such amount of punitive damages as the court may allow; and (3) in the case of any successful action to enforce any liability under this section, the costs of the action together with reasonable attorney's fees as dtermined by the court. ***Although this one is considered criminal, I am going to throw it in the complaint for "grins"** FCRA § 619. Obtaining information under false pretenses Any person who knowingly and willfully obtains information on a consumer from a consumer reporting agency under false pretenses shall be fined under title 18, United States Code, imprisoned for not more than 2 years, or both. What do ya think?? Keller
Whyspers, You're thoughts are in line with me. I think that's the logic behind Asset Acceptance and their plight with me. The rep told me they can continue to attempt to collect, but can't sue me becuase the SOL. I knew they couldn't report on my credit or Call Me. Just Letters, but they screwed up by pulling a hard inquiry out of malice!!!!!!!
It makes sense to me that if they aren't able to report it, they shouldn't be able to pull an inquiry. If one of you guys takes this all the way, it will be interesting to see how it plays out. L
Yep, you're right.... I'm loading my truck up tonight and heading down that road to dump this lawsuit on the front lawn of Michael J. Beach, Corporate Counsel at Asset Acceptance. (Thanks for the Name Betacredit) It's obvious precedents are needed to uphold the law, and clearly these suckers have to be handled. One angry disgruntle employee can damage thousands of employees and a Company, and that One angry employee who i laughed in their face showed me how important her compliance to the FCDPA was. When the Load is dropped off I'll radio back in and update everyone.. 10-4
Someone please correct me if I am wrong; however, I believe they do have the right to report it, as long as they report before it ages to 7 years. Also, I believe they can continue to try to collect, even after the SOL expires...but they have no legal recourse to make you pay. Insummary, they can report & inquire until the 7 years are up. Then they can still continue to try to collect, even after your state's sol is up. That's my understanding of the law. As I said before, someone correct/clarify if I am wrong. Calmest_LA
Yes you're right, thats what we've said.. My situation acct charged off in 1989, tick tock, tick tock acct falls of 1996.. Now there were no CA collecting on the account during the legal time. I'm in GA so the SOL is 4 years... So Any CA had to do their dirty work before 1996!!!! In the Year 2001 here comes ASS ACCEPTANCE.. They purchased a old debt which as almost doubled the 7yr reporting... While you're right they can report prior to the legal 7 year, but can they apply Arithmatic??? I CAN..... I can Add $1,000 + $1,000 + $1,000 = $3,000 I can Multiply $1,000 X 3= $3000 I can Subtract $6,000-$3,000 = $3,000 Hopefully They can Write......
ONE CORRECTION, YA'LL. YES. THEY "CAN" CONTINUE TO "TRY" AND GET YOU TO PAY AFTER THE SOL HAS EXPIRED. AND ALTHOUGH THE SOL HAS EXPIRED, THAT DOESN'T NEGATE THE FACT THAT IT CAN STAY ON YOUR CREDIT REPORT FOR 7 YEARS FROM THE TIME IT WENT DELINQUENT OR THE CHARGE-OFF DATE (DEPENDING ON THE AGE OF THE ACCOUNT, I.E., PRIOR TO THE NEW LAW) BUT THEY CANNOT PULL "HARD" INQUIRIES WITHOUT A "PERMISSIBLE" PURPOSE. THE LAW STATES WHAT A PERMISSIBLE PURPOSE IS AND TECHNICALLY (AS FAR AS THE LAW IS CONCERNED) YOU NO LONGER LEGALLY OWE THAT DEBT. BY THAT, I MEAN, THEY CANNOT "FORCE" YOU TO PAY IT ALTHOUGH ANYONE CAN SUE ANYONE FOR ANY REASON, YOU HAVE "ABSOLUTE DEFENSE" ON AN OUTDATED DEBT. . .DON'T TAKE THAT FOR GRANTED, THOUGH. MAKE SURE YOU BRING DOCUMENTATION TO PROVE IT IN COURT. PULLING A "HARD" INQUIRY IS ONLY FOR CREDIT PURPOSES WITH COMPANIES THAT YOU ARE SEEKING TO DO BUSINESS WITH OR WITH COMPANIES THAT YOU HAVE A "LEGAL" OBLIGATION TO. IF THE SOL HAS PAST, YOU NO LONGER HAVE THE "LEGAL" OBLIGATION. THEREFORE, THEY ARE (1) MISREPRESENTING THE LEGAL STATUS OF THE DEBT AND (2) OBTAINING INFORMATION ON A CONSUMER WITHOUT PERMISSIBLE PURPOSE. ***THIS IS "MY" UNDERSTANDING OF THE LAW FROM RESEARCH, FTC OPINION LETTERS, READING UP ON THE LAWS, ETC.*** I COULD BE WRONG AS WELL. AND IF I AM MISTAKEN. . .PLEASE LET ME KNOW BEFORE I TRY AND USE THIS ARGUEMENT IN COURT. KELLER :O)
