Re: HELP: Violation? Yes/No? What next? Well, I don't know about that. There isn't clear language prohibitting it, but the reasonableness may be at question, given your letter. However, can you prove they called you at home or work? It's great and all to KNOW they broke the law, but if it's not provable then you don't have any business in court.
Re: HELP: Violation? Yes/No? What next? Butch, Would you mindind helping me out and posting the backup for that? Thanks!
Re: HELP: Violation? Yes/No? What next? § 805. Communication in connection with debt collection [15 USC 1692c] (a) COMMUNICATION WITH THE CONSUMER GENERALLY. Without the prior consent of the consumer given directly to the debt collector or the express permission of a court of competent jurisdiction, a debt collector may not communicate with a consumer in connection with the collection of any debt -- (1) at any unusual time or place or a time or place known or which should be known to be inconvenient to the consumer. In the absence of knowledge of circumstances to the contrary, a debt collector shall assume that the convenient time for communicating with a consumer is after 8 o'clock antimeridian and before 9 o'clock postmeridian, local time at the consumer's location; A time or place known to be inconvenient is your job. DCs are good for calling you many times a day or every every day. They usually don't say who they are until you get on the phone and if they leave a message it's just to call so-and-so at 123-456-7890. They don't necessarily say Mr. or Mrs. Collector. They can just say Billy at 555-1234. So you are constantly getting calls asking for you that could sound like it's just a friend. Most people are not allowed to get non-emergency calls at work. Once you tell them that you can not call you at work and they do it, it's a violation. You do not need to prove that you are not able to get calls. That's common sense.
Re: HELP: Violation? Yes/No? What next? http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/fdcpa/fdcpact.htm#805 (c) CEASING COMMUNICATION. If a consumer notifies a debt collector in writing that the consumer refuses to pay a debt or that the consumer wishes the debt collector to cease further communication with the consumer, the debt collector shall not communicate further with the consumer with respect to such debt, except -- (1) to advise the consumer that the debt collector's further efforts are being terminated; (2) to notify the consumer that the debt collector or creditor may invoke specified remedies which are ordinarily invoked by such debt collector or creditor; or (3) where applicable, to notify the consumer that the debt collector or creditor intends to invoke a specified remedy. If such notice from the consumer is made by mail, notification shall be complete upon receipt. Sassy P.S. Do yourself a favor -- read the WHOLE Act as well as the FCRA. Read the opinion letters too!
Re: HELP: Violation? Yes/No? What next? I think your'e talking to someone else, but I agree. Read the FDCPA, FCRA, the FTC opinion letters and check out your state's laws. A lot of states have their own version of the FDCPA. I keep them saved on my computer and read them while preparing for court(less than a week to go, Providian!). I've read them so much that I've quoted them freeform to the Compliance Managers and lawyers that I've been dealing with. It gives you more confidence when they contact you. The ratio of educated consumers vs. undeucated consumers swings heavily in their favor, so when they reach one of us Creditnetters, THEY get shook.
Re: HELP: Violation? Yes/No? What next? I didn't say that. I said you needed to prove you GOT calls. But you certainly need to show that the CA should have reason to believe you can't get calls at work. I would contend that merely not wanting them _may_ not be enough reason. Telling them in no uncertain terms are you allowed to receive calls at work certainly IS reason. It still leaves the burden of proof that they called on you...
Re: HELP: Violation? Yes/No? What next? Sassy posted the "Cease Communication" provision. If you're wanting to know if that covers phone calls, YES, even though it doesn't say so. This provision allows you to essentially cut off all comunications from the CA. Doing a partial cease and desist, cutting off phone calls but allowing mail in order to preserve your paper trail, would certainly be viewed favorably by a court. It's even LESS restrictive than what the law permited in the first place. See?
Re: HELP: Violation? Yes/No? What next? Well, one call to the phone company can provide proof. If it got as far as court, the CA's phone records could be subpoenaed. Pain in the ass, yes. But would it prove that they called? Yes. The CA knows that it would. I doubt that they would deny it. Perjury isn't a good thing. I was speaking on the assumption that the CA was told that there could be no calls at work. When they take your work number on the application, its first use is to verify employment. It's second is to reach you in case your account is paid late. They have a window of time that they are allowed to call you (8am-9pm your time), home or work. It would make more sense to call your house and avoid all of the drama, but if they were interested in skipping the drama we wouldn't have this board, would we? I am not presently dealing with any CAs calling me, therefore I do not need the C&D. If I was, however, I would put it in the validation request, tape the whole conversation in which I told the CA not to call my job or send the C&D via fax or CMRRR.
And I was just going off the letter: I dunno, I'm not a lawyer. I see no clear language providing for a partial cesation of communication in the FDCPA. In all likelyhood, the mechanism for cease and desist is probably burried in common law. Dunno if that makes it an FDCPA violation though... I think we agree on the basic principal, I just don't know that he invoked his FDCPA right to no calls at work in his letter. He didn't say anything about them not being allowed.
