At: http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/pIch96.html [ The collection of any unlawful debt ] Sec. 1962. - Prohibited activities (a) It shall be unlawful for any person who has received any income derived, directly or indirectly, from a pattern of racketeering activity or through collection of an unlawful debt in which such person has participated as a principal within the meaning of section 2, title 18, United States Code, to use or invest, directly or indirectly, any part of such income, or the proceeds of such income, in acquisition of any interest in, or the establishment or operation of, any enterprise which is engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce. A purchase of securities on the open market for purposes of investment, and without the intention of controlling or participating in the control of the issuer, or of assisting another to do so, shall not be unlawful under this subsection if the securities of the issuer held by the purchaser, the members of his immediate family, and his or their accomplices in any pattern or racketeering activity or the collection of an unlawful debt after such purchase do not amount in the aggregate to one percent of the outstanding securities of any one class, and do not confer, either in law or in fact, the power to elect one or more directors of the issuer. (b) It shall be unlawful for any person through a pattern of racketeering activity or through collection of an unlawful debt to acquire or maintain, directly or indirectly, any interest in or control of any enterprise which is engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce. (c) It shall be unlawful for any person employed by or associated with any enterprise engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce, to conduct or participate, directly or indirectly, in the conduct of such enterprise's affairs through a pattern of racketeering activity or collection of unlawful debt. (d) It shall be unlawful for any person to conspire to violate any of the provisions of subsection (a), (b), or (c) of this section Sec. 1963. - Criminal penalties (a) Whoever violates any provision of section 1962 of this chapter shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years (or for life if the violation is based on a racketeering activity for which the maximum penalty includes life imprisonment), or both, and shall forfeit to the United States, irrespective of any provision of State law - TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 13 > Sec. 241. Sec. 241. - Conspiracy against rights If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured - They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 96 > Sec. 1968. Prev Sec. 1968. - Civil investigative demand (a) Whenever the Attorney General has reason to believe that any person or enterprise may be in possession, custody, or control of any documentary materials relevant to a racketeering investigation, he may, prior to the institution of a civil or criminal proceeding thereon, issue in writing, and cause to be served upon such person, a civil investigative demand requiring such person to produce such material for examination. Just thinkin out loud.
(a)It shall be unlawful for any person who has received any income derived, directly or indirectly, from a pattern of racketeering activity or through collection of an unlawful debt in which such person has participated as a principal within the meaning of section 2, title 18, United States Code, to use or invest, directly or indirectly, any part of such income, or the proceeds of such income, in acquisition of any interest in, or the establishment or operation of, any enterprise which is engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce. Couple nuances would need to be proven. - the unlawful debt where the person has particapted as a principal - definition of principal as to include a CRA - accomplice defined as a CA - what commerce was affected (easiest one to prove) (b) - Are there any board of director relationships with employees of CRAs and subsequent collection agencies. i.e. equifax the CRA and equifax collections? (c) - definition of racketeering as to specifically include violations of the FDCPA and FCRA - intr.v. rack·et·eered, rack·et·eer·ing, rack·et·eers - To carry on illegal business activities that involve crimes. Since it has already been proven that they have violated the different consumer protection acts - via small claims - wouldnt it then stand to reason they have already violated (d) Just my .02 as a non-lawyer Parul
Re: A Few RICO thoughts--Hogwash!! The idea of getting collection agencies in trouble with the Rico Act is pure HOGWASH! Here is why! Title 18, PART1 SAYS: (6) ''unlawful debt'' means a debt (A) incurred or contracted in gambling activity which was in violation of the law of the United States, a State or political subdivision thereof, or which is unenforceable under State or Federal law in whole or in part as to principal or interest because of the laws relating to usury, and (B) which was incurred in connection with the business of gambling in violation of the law of the United States, a State or political subdivision thereof, or the business of lending money or a thing of value at a rate usurious under State or Federal law, where the usurious rate is at least twice the enforceable rate; None of the above definitions fit the description of what a collection agency does nor does it lend money or anything of value to anyone. Pure HOGWASH!!!
Re: A Few RICO thoughts--Hogwash!! RICO is an enormous law and covers a hell of a lot more than gambling. Please do a lot more reading before you comment. LOL
Re: A Few RICO thoughts--Hogwash!! RICCO was orginally passed as a weapon to combat organized crime but, it's use has expanded into the civil arena. In the mid 80's the brokerage firm that I worked for got sued under RICCO for selling SPDA's underwriten by Baldwin United who filed Chapter 11. They plantiffs won. All of the recent tobacco litigation that resulted in billion dollar settlements was done under RICCO. To say it can't apply to CRA's and Ca's is well, {forgive me} Hogwash. As to the odds of a lawsuit using these statues-who knows?
Re: A Few RICO thoughts--Hogwash!! Hey Butch, I think you may have gotten a big CRA fish to rise to the surface. Nice trolling. I'm thinking that this is a good threat to pursue. Who could bring a cause of action for violation of the RICO statutes? Wouldn't we have to petition the Justice Department? RICO is a criminal statue is it not. What we need to do is shut down the current system and replace it with a system that s fair and equitable to th consumer. If it is truly the consumer that drives the economy, which I believe, then we could make the case that the curent system is hurting the economy because it causes the consumer to pay a much higher price for credit. thoughts? CBJ
Re: A Few RICO thoughts--Hogwash!! I noticed that too CBJ, I think he just registered this morning in order to make that comment. Maybe it's Carla Blair, or Don Richman. Boy if this is the case then we ARE onto something, wouldn't you guy's say? LOL PS. thanx for the backup Keepmine.
Re: A Few RICO thoughts--Hogwash!! I would think that it would either have to be a ADA or a federal prosecutor... I believe you are correct though about it being a criminal charge and not civil though its basis can start in civil proceedings. I am no lawyer - but I think there is definitely something there. Anyone know a prosecutor? Parul
Re: A Few RICO thoughts--Hogwash!! I AM already pursuing RICO. You may want to review a cpl of my threads, here thay are: For background on the CA go to:http://consumers.creditnet.com/stra...highlight=astonishing+ca+stupidity#post177398 For my response go to:http://consumers.creditnet.com/stra...highlight=astonishing+ca+stupidity#post182483 ALL this stuff is true. Already these people are starting to jump like someone threw a firecracker in their pants. LOL [developing] Don't worry I'll keep yall informed. Originally only DOJ could bring RICO charges but Keepmine is right. It has been expanded to provide for civil remedy. As far as shutting down the entire system? LOL - I like BIG thinkers.
Re: A Few RICO thoughts--Hogwash!! I can definitely see where we can use this in our lawsuits. Wonderful find!!!
Re: A Few RICO thoughts--Hogwash!! I wonder, would a RICO suit even be necessary now that Nelson vs Chase Manhattan is on the books? That case gives individuals the right to sue CRA's and creditors for reporting false and inaccurate information. You can sue individually and get results a lot faster than waiting around for a RICO suit to be organized.
Re: A Few RICO thoughts--Hogwash!! Racketeering and participating in an ongoing criminal enterprise would be FAR more serious.
Re: A Few RICO thoughts--Hogwash!! They are in collusion with the credit companies and they are scared. I was talking to this puke yesterday and he stated that the Gulf State account that turned into the OSI account was a differnet account. Why the freak should he care if that account is on my report? It's a BS way to do business, and I hope we can prove why they care. Are they getting kick backs? CBJ
Re: A Few RICO thoughts--Hogwash!! I agree i'm tired of hearing this 'upholding the integrity of the credit reporting system' BS they would not have inaccuracies on over 70 percent of credit reports if this was such a priorty.....something else seems to be behind it.
Re: A Few RICO thoughts--Hogwash!! Hey CBJ, I FOUND HOGWASH! He's the intelectual giant named Bill Bauer. Here's his post; http://pub50.ezboard.com/fcreditwrenchfrm1.showMessage?topicID=338.topic The Rico Act ala Crudnet, the disinformation station. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- At: www4.law.cornell.edu/usco...Ich96.html [ The collection of any unlawful debt ] Sec. 1962. - Prohibited activities (a) It shall be unlawful for any person who has received any income derived, directly or indirectly, from a pattern of racketeering activity or through collection of an unlawful debt in which such person has participated as a principal within the meaning of section 2, title 18, United States Code, to use or invest, directly or indirectly, any part of such income, or the proceeds of such income, in acquisition of any interest in, or the establishment or operation of, any enterprise which is engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce. A purchase of securities on the open market for purposes of investment, and without the intention of controlling or participating in the control of the issuer, or of assisting another to do so, shall not be unlawful under this subsection if the securities of the issuer held by the purchaser, the members of his immediate family, and his or their accomplices in any pattern or racketeering activity or the collection of an unlawful debt after such purchase do not amount in the aggregate to one percent of the outstanding securities of any one class, and do not confer, either in law or in fact, the power to elect one or more directors of the issuer. (b) It shall be unlawful for any person through a pattern of racketeering activity or through collection of an unlawful debt to acquire or maintain, directly or indirectly, any interest in or control of any enterprise which is engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce. (c) It shall be unlawful for any person employed by or associated with any enterprise engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce, to conduct or participate, directly or indirectly, in the conduct of such enterprise's affairs through a pattern of racketeering activity or collection of unlawful debt. (d) It shall be unlawful for any person to conspire to violate any of the provisions of subsection (a), (b), or (c) of this section Sec. 1963. - Criminal penalties (a) Whoever violates any provision of section 1962 of this chapter shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years (or for life if the violation is based on a racketeering activity for which the maximum penalty includes life imprisonment), or both, and shall forfeit to the United States, irrespective of any provision of State law - TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 13 > Sec. 241. Sec. 241. - Conspiracy against rights If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured - They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 96 > Sec. 1968. Prev Sec. 1968. - Civil investigative demand (a) Whenever the Attorney General has reason to believe that any person or enterprise may be in possession, custody, or control of any documentary materials relevant to a racketeering investigation, he may, prior to the institution of a civil or criminal proceeding thereon, issue in writing, and cause to be served upon such person, a civil investigative demand requiring such person to produce such material for examination. Just thinkin out loud. Ok. Well let's just do a little more of that "thinkin" shall we? The poster goes on and here is where it starts to get really wild as a second poster starts to pick up on the brain storm session. (a)It shall be unlawful for any person who has received any income derived, directly or indirectly, from a pattern of racketeering activity or through collection of an unlawful debt in which such person has participated as a principal within the meaning of section 2, title 18, United States Code, to use or invest, directly or indirectly, any part of such income, or the proceeds of such income, in acquisition of any interest in, or the establishment or operation of, any enterprise which is engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce. Couple nuances would need to be proven. - the unlawful debt where the person has particapted as a principal - definition of principal as to include a CRA - accomplice defined as a CA - what commerce was affected (easiest one to prove) (b) - Are there any board of director relationships with employees of CRAs and subsequent collection agencies. i.e. equifax the CRA and equifax collections? (c) - definition of racketeering as to specifically include violations of the FDCPA and FCRA - intr.v. rack·et·eered, rack·et·eer·ing, rack·et·eers - To carry on illegal business activities that involve crimes. Since it has already been proven that they have violated the different consumer protection acts - via small claims - wouldnt it then stand to reason they have already violated (d) Now then, it ought to be obvious to anybody with enough brains to walk and chew gum that we got them cotton pickin bill collectors right where we want them! Can you just imagine that a bill collector dings you and you file a Rico charge on them? Why you could put them away for the next 20 years at least. We just knew them nasty bill collectors was racketeers all along, didn't we? What's that you say? Read the definitions section? Where's that at? (5) ''pattern of racketeering activity'' requires at least two acts of racketeering activity, one of which occurred after the effective date of this chapter and the last of which occurred within ten years (excluding any period of imprisonment) after the commission of a prior act of racketeering activity; You surely don't mean that before we can charge them with a violation of the Rico act we would have to prove that the bill collector had violated it at least two times, do you? (6) ''unlawful debt'' means a debt (A) incurred or contracted in gambling activity which was in violation of the law of the United States, a State or political subdivision thereof, or which is unenforceable under State or Federal law in whole or in part as to principal or interest because of the laws relating to usury, and (B) which was incurred in connection with the business of gambling in violation of the law of the United States, a State or political subdivision thereof, or the business of lending money or a thing of value at a rate usurious under State or Federal law, where the usurious rate is at least twice the enforceable rate; Oh! Now we really got them! Anybody knows that it's a big gamble if they think they are going to ever collect a crying dime out of us. But that business about lending money or a thing of value. Bummer! Anybody knows they don't lend you anything and what they do sure isn't a thing of value to me. Hey! I wonder just how long it will take before somebody on that wonderful message board will have all of that turned into a great letter we can beat them bill collectors to death with. Only on the disinformation station could it possibly happen. LOL
