FARK.com: (5731018) Just because a debt collector signs a sworn statement and gives testimony affirming that they personally double-checked your paperwork, doesn't mean they actually did

If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

		Just because a debt collector signs a sworn statement and gives testimony affirming that they personally double-checked your paperwork, doesn't mean they actually did (nytimes.com)		85
		More: Obvious

• • •

9957 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 Nov 2010 at 12:18 PM | Favorite | share:

Share this link:

URL:

http://fark.com/go/5731018

Bookmark:

Article Comments close

85 Comments (+0 »)

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

floor9		2010-11-02 09:00:24 AM

If a debt collector gets hold of your personal information, perhaps because a debtor previously lived at your address -- as was in my case -- your life can become a living hell while you duke it out in the legal system. Sadly, simply being debt-free is no longer sufficient protection against debt collectors. Instead, your best defense is to read your local Rules of Civil Procedure and find out how to defend yourself. Most consumers don't know how the legal system works, and there's nothing like finding out you've got a judgment against you because the debt collector "served" you at the wrong address. Getting a judgment vacated on the grounds that you never owed the money in the first place is a lot harder than it sounds.

Here's a test:

You receive a summons and appear in court. A debt collector testifies that you owe American Express $8000 plus an additional $3500 in fees, interest, and legal costs. You've never had an American Express account, but the debt collector has a signed piece of paper swearing that you do.

What do you do? Remember, just telling the judge that you don't owe the money doesn't work, and saying "this must be some kind of mistake" isn't a defense.

ZAZ		2010-11-02 09:04:54 AM

You receive a summons and appear in court.

Small claims or real court? If it's real court there are a whole bunch of steps between getting the piece of paper and going to trial.

floor9		2010-11-02 09:12:23 AM

ZAZ: Small claims or real court? If it's real court there are a whole bunch of steps between getting the piece of paper and going to trial.

Let's say small claims, because it's easier. Either way, though, most consumers are going to be lost.

EatHam		2010-11-02 09:21:05 AM

floor9: What do you do?

Having had that exact scenario happen, except it wasn't with Amex, it was with Verizon, I ask them to provide proof that I have an account, including payment history and application. They go "oops, this isn't your social security number at all" and stop bothering me.

floor9		2010-11-02 09:29:26 AM

EatHam: Having had that exact scenario happen, except it wasn't with Amex, it was with Verizon, I ask them to provide proof that I have an account, including payment history and application. They go "oops, this isn't your social security number at all" and stop bothering me.

That's exactly what you should do when they first contact you. Assuming it's a debt collector and not the original creditor, they are obligated to provide some element of proof that the alleged debt is yours, or at least halt collection efforts until they do. This is known as requesting "validation" of a debt, and it only has teeth if you do it within the first 30 days of the debt collector contacting you. Unfortunately, what passes for "successful validation" has never been explicitly defined by the courts, and a simple piece of paper from the original creditor saying "Yes, we reviewed this debt, and Joe Smith owes us $xxxx" is sufficient.

When it goes to court, it's another matter. In theory, they're obligated to provide this information as evidence. In reality, most debt collectors file suites en masse and, as TFA shows, are fudging their paperwork.

I would object to the affidavit as hearsay. But I'm just an Internet Armchair Non-Lawyer, and there is more than one way to ~~skin~~ pet a cat.

Kasira		2010-11-02 10:09:42 AM

floor9: Unfortunately, what passes for "successful validation" has never been explicitly defined by the courts, and a simple piece of paper from the original creditor saying "Yes, we reviewed this debt, and Joe Smith owes us $xxxx" is sufficient.

That's when you write them back and say, "This isn't evidence of jack. If you contact me again I'm suing you under the FDCPA."

I had a heating oil company try to collect on me for bills dated a year after I'd moved (and the account had been changed to the new tenant). They sent me records of the fill-ups at the address as proof that I owed. I sent them a letter restating that I had moved, and the above, and they dropped it.

ZAZ		2010-11-02 10:22:02 AM

I would object to the affidavit as hearsay.

Your honor, this falls under the business records exception.

nekom		2010-11-02 10:32:08 AM

ZAZ: I would object to the affidavit as hearsay.

Your honor, this falls under the business records exception.

No it does not, as the paperwork was manufactured for the explicit purpose of litigation and not generated in the normal course of business.

floor9		2010-11-02 10:39:48 AM

Kasira: That's when you write them back and say, "This isn't evidence of jack. If you contact me again I'm suing you under the FDCPA."

Unfortunately, it doesn't work that way. The FDCPA doesn't spell out what is required for "validation". Your particular case worked, though - sounds like you were dealing with the original creditor.

ZAZ: Your honor, this falls under the business records exception.

If I were going to court with this, I would have brought along copies of my credit report from all three bureaus, which would hold any account reporting for the past seven-or-so years. Being that this would cover my state's statute of limitations on credit card debt (four years from date of final missed payment), they would be within a relevant timeframe. I would expect the debt collector to then argue that my reports are hearsay or otherwise irrelevant, but I would argue that the very lack of any data from AmEx on not one, but three reports maintained by three independent companies presents the probability that someone's records are in error. I would also question the validity of the person signing the affidavit. Who are they? Do they exist? What do they do? Did they review this account? Did they safeguard their data against pollution or corruption?

The Business Records Exception assumes that there is no reasonable question to the trustworthiness of the documents. If I couldn't get the affidavit outright dismissed as evidence by claiming hearsay, at least I could show a high likelihood of its inaccuracy and raise a great deal of uncertainty about the validity of its source.

floor9		2010-11-02 10:40:24 AM

nekom: No it does not, as the paperwork was manufactured for the explicit purpose of litigation and not generated in the normal course of business.

Very nice.

nekom		2010-11-02 10:43:58 AM

Like so:

Comes now, Defendant John Doe and respectfully states the following:

1. Plaintiff has submitted into evidence an AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S CLAIM (hereinafter referred to as "Affidavit").

2. Plaintiff has no evidence to support that they are the owner of said debt. The record does not disclose this information and it cannot be assumed without creating an unfair prejudice against the Defendant.

3. Said Affidavit pertains to acts and events that allegedly occurred between Defendant and a third party, Bank of America

3. At no time was the creator of the Affidavits , or any of Plaintiffs employees present to witness any alleged acts or creation of the records of transactions occurring between Defendant and Bank of America.

4. As such said Affidavit falls under the hearsay rule and is inadmissible as evidence.

5. Defendant further states that the Affidavit is not subject to the Hearsay Business Records Exemption because it was not made at or near the time of the alleged acts or events, and;

6. The information contained in the Affidavit is merely an accumulation of hearsay, and;

7. Upon information and belief, the creator of the document is not currently and has never been employed with Bank of America and therefore cannot have personal knowledge of how Bank of America records were prepared and maintained, and;

8. Is unqualified to testify as to the truth of the information contained in the Affidavit.

WHEREFORE, the Defendant prays this Honorable Court that Plaintiff's Affidavit be stricken from evidence in the above action.

There's some caselaw on this out there but damned if I can find it.

floor9		2010-11-02 11:09:05 AM

nekom: Like so:

It makes me sad, how many times I sit in on civil sessions at the county courthouse, only to find people trying to defend themselves with terrible advice they've picked up on some forum somewhere. Or whose impression of how a court works is an amalgamation of what they've seen on Judge Judy and Law & Order. Everybody really should spend a day or two just observing a day in their local court, if for no reason other than it being a very educational, civic, and sometimes entertaining experience. The legal system is not so vast and complex as to prevent most people from defending themselves against the types of frivolous, ill-equipped claims that most debt collectors file. Especially at the small claims / MDJ level, where most judges are fairly tolerant and patient with pro se litigants.

Weaver95		2010-11-02 11:20:10 AM

nekom		2010-11-02 11:20:42 AM

floor9: nekom: Like so:

It makes me sad, how many times I sit in on civil sessions at the county courthouse, only to find people trying to defend themselves with terrible advice they've picked up on some forum somewhere. Or whose impression of how a court works is an amalgamation of what they've seen on Judge Judy and Law & Order. Everybody really should spend a day or two just observing a day in their local court, if for no reason other than it being a very educational, civic, and sometimes entertaining experience. The legal system is not so vast and complex as to prevent most people from defending themselves against the types of frivolous, ill-equipped claims that most debt collectors file. Especially at the small claims / MDJ level, where most judges are fairly tolerant and patient with pro se litigants.

Especially given that most debt collector attorneys file in batches hoping for (and generally getting) default judgments when the alleged debtor fails to show. Many drop the case immediately at the first sign of a defense, even a pro se one. Fact is EVEN IF the debt was legitimately owed (in many cases it never even was), the burden of proof is on the plaintiff and more often than not they simply do not have sufficient (if any) evidence to substantiate their claim.

Kasira		2010-11-02 11:32:27 AM

floor9: Kasira: That's when you write them back and say, "This isn't evidence of jack. If you contact me again I'm suing you under the FDCPA."

Unfortunately, it doesn't work that way. The FDCPA doesn't spell out what is required for "validation". Your particular case worked, though - sounds like you were dealing with the original creditor.

It had gone on to a collections agency - this was 4-5 years after I'd left the place. I guess I lucked out, though.

Silly_Sot		2010-11-02 12:22:27 PM

If a private citizen pulled this shiat, he'd have to just man up and eat the loss--the courts would force it. Therefore, justice demands that ALL of these robo-signed collections must be canceled and the debts erased from credit reports. Anything else is plutocratic, and love of money is the root of all sorts of evils, as Scripture says.

Therefore, the courts can follow Scripture and cancel the robo-signed debts, or they can be Satanists.

trotsky		2010-11-02 12:27:35 PM

This is what screwed me... the judge took their side, even though they only had my name on the Corporate Accounts, along with others as well. They never could ship me anything more than cc statement which were obviously for a business. I had never signed anything, and never used that farking card for anything but business shiat.

But the judge agreed with them. fark the judge.

Fubini		2010-11-02 12:30:35 PM

nekom: Especially given that most debt collector attorneys file in batches hoping for (and generally getting) default judgments when the alleged debtor fails to show. Many drop the case immediately at the first sign of a defense, even a pro se one. Fact is EVEN IF the debt was legitimately owed (in many cases it never even was), the burden of proof is on the plaintiff and more often than not they simply do not have sufficient (if any) evidence to substantiate their claim.

It makes me wonder when people are just going to start extorting people for the hell of it. It reminds me of the story a while back about a law firm in Britain who only filed P2P filesharing lawsuits, normally settling for around $500-$1000 per suit. If the defendants didn't immediately roll over and settle they would drop litigation, only promising that they would pursue the matter at some later time. Despite filing thousands of claims the firm had not litigated one case.

It's a damn crying shame when the system of law and justice becomes so opaque that the idea of being involved in court proceedings is enough of a threat to cause people to fork over $500-$1000 on demand.

SweetSilverBlues		2010-11-02 12:32:36 PM

Weaver95: EatHam: floor9: What do you do?

Having had that exact scenario happen, except it wasn't with Amex, it was with Verizon, I ask them to provide proof that I have an account, including payment history and application. They go "oops, this isn't your social security number at all" and stop bothering me.

hmm...that was much better than my answer, which involved hacking their personal computer and planting kiddie porn for the FBI to find.

I like this answer better.

steamingpile		2010-11-02 12:33:37 PM

EatHam: floor9: What do you do?

Having had that exact scenario happen, except it wasn't with Amex, it was with Verizon, I ask them to provide proof that I have an account, including payment history and application. They go "oops, this isn't your social security number at all" and stop bothering me.

I get to deal with this shiat from the state income tax my father owes on a business that they did not pay all their taxes they owed. They cross referenced the address and found both of our names(very close since im a jr) and put it on my credit report, they didnt even check the SS numbers and that would have gotten rid of it since his is from another state/year. farking equifax, now I am supposed to get a copy of the public records then get that to them somehow to prove to them how stupid they are.

I dont understand why they could just look at the SS number in the first place since they obviously found the filing to realize even the first few numbers do not match.

/pissed at my fathers accountant
//pissed at equifax

Fubini		2010-11-02 12:39:53 PM

Fubini: It makes me wonder when people are just going to start extorting people for the hell of it. It reminds me of the story a while back about a law firm in Britain who only filed P2P filesharing lawsuits, normally settling for around $500-$1000 per suit. If the defendants didn't immediately roll over and settle they would drop litigation, only promising that they would pursue the matter at some later time. Despite filing thousands of claims the firm had not litigated one case.

Thinking about it further, it makes me wish sometimes that the supreme court could just issue a summary precedent, without a particular trial taking place. Or maybe a kind of mock trial, where the court would appoint lawyers to argue a made up case for the sole purpose of setting precedent.

There are certain major practices where the legality of said practice has never been affirmed or denied in court simply because the companies who stand to benefit never prosecute violations. Perfect example from above: there is very, very little case law on P2P copyright violations. Most people think that the methods being used by firms prosecuting these cases would not stand up in court, so the companies never go to bat because if their method was struck down in court it would shut off the money spigot overnight. I'd love it if the SCOTUS was able to pre-emptively rule on the practice saying "Cut that shait out."

Of course, there's the whole unintended consequences thing. I have a feeling that I don't want SCOTUS as a de-facto second legislative body.

que.guero		2010-11-02 12:46:17 PM

You know, this wouldn't be a problem if people just paid their bills they didn't incur...

inglixthemad		2010-11-02 12:46:40 PM

I had some jerk threaten to sue me (although he was giving the wrong first name the whole time, and refused to believe I wasn't person X) over the phone once. I asked him to write down a telephone number and talk to attorney Y, my personal shark that will gladly "deal" with him regarding the manner. I also called my attorney and gave him what info I had.

Never heard from those idiots again.

nekom		2010-11-02 12:47:49 PM

Fubini:
It makes me wonder when people are just going to start extorting people for the hell of it. It reminds me of the story a while back about a law firm in Britain who only filed P2P filesharing lawsuits, normally settling for around $500-$1000 per suit. If the defendants didn't immediately roll over and settle they would drop litigation, only promising that they would pursue the matter at some later time. Despite filing thousands of claims the firm had not litigated one case.

It's a damn crying shame when the system of law and justice becomes so opaque that the idea of being involved in court proceedings is enough of a threat to cause people to fork over $500-$1000 on demand.

Junk debt buyers aren't far off of outright scams. In many cases, they buy a `portfolio' of old debt which in many cases is literally NOTHING more than a spreadsheet with name, social security# and amount `owed'. No signed contracts, no billing statements, nothing but a few entries in a table. They buy these for pennies on the dollar and collect what they can. Some of the accounts are beyond the statute of limitations for litigation (some even beyond SOL for credit reporting), some were discharged in bankruptcy, some are mistakes.

They throw as much crap at the wall as possible and see what sticks, and believe it or not some of them make an absolute killing doing just that. They'll lie, they'll forge documents, they'll do whatever it takes for the easy marks, and generally go away when anyone fights back.

trotsky		2010-11-02 12:48:45 PM

que.guero: You know, this wouldn't be a problem if people just paid their bills they didn't incur...

8/10: Good form,excellent generalization and seemingly serious.

cig-mkr		2010-11-02 12:51:25 PM

I guess the innocent until proven guilty doesn't apply here? Show me the facts and prove I actually owe you the money would be nice.
I'm the type that would burn a blanket to kill a flea. That said, I would really make somebodys life really miserable for farking up my credit, up close personal and in your face. That's what they understand.

SweetSilverBlues		2010-11-02 12:51:57 PM

inglixthemad: I had some jerk threaten to sue me (although he was giving the wrong first name the whole time, and refused to believe I wasn't person X) over the phone once. I asked him to write down a telephone number and talk to attorney Y, my personal shark that will gladly "deal" with him regarding the manner. I also called my attorney and gave him what info I had.

Never heard from those idiots again.

If a woman named "Clarissa Jenkins" is a Farker and formerly had a phone number ending in 3174, let me just say you owe a lot of farkin' money to a lot of farkin' people and I ain't gonna pay it.

Thank you.

This is the phone number they have for Clarissa Jenkins, ergo, I am Clarissa Jenkins and must pay off her Visa, student loan, and miscellaneous other debts.

GalFriday		2010-11-02 12:57:59 PM

EatHam: floor9: What do you do?

Having had that exact scenario happen, except it wasn't with Amex, it was with Verizon, I ask them to provide proof that I have an account, including payment history and application. They go "oops, this isn't your social security number at all" and stop bothering me.

Have tried that repeatedly with Sprint. They still bother me. See, someone opened up a Sprint account and used my phone number for their alternate phone number, ran up a $2400 bill and never paid. Sprint now has no information on this person except my number and calls me EVERYDAY. I have tried to talking to them and have been told that because I have a number in common with Debbie Rae Maymon (that is the actual name of the person that owes Sprint), I am responsible for the bill. I hate Sprint.

Mayor Bee		2010-11-02 12:58:07 PM

trotsky: que.guero: You know, this wouldn't be a problem if people just paid their bills they didn't incur...

8/10: Good form,excellent generalization and seemingly serious.

I could be wrong, but it seems that que.guero was being sarcastic, not trolling.

SpillyFarker		2010-11-02 12:59:25 PM

nekom: Junk debt buyers aren't far off of outright scams. In many cases, they buy a `portfolio' of old debt which in many cases is literally NOTHING more than a spreadsheet with name, social security# and amount `owed'. No signed contracts, no billing statements, nothing but a few entries in a table.

I do not understand how this is legal in any sense and it infuriates me that Chase and other entities can write the loss off as a business expense, then sell the debt to these people for collection.

What really infuriates me is when they utilize local and county services to collect on said debt and then the amount of "bail" is conveniently set as the amount owed.

SpillyFarker		2010-11-02 01:00:31 PM

Also, I like the word "infuriate" today apparently...

GalFriday		2010-11-02 01:00:38 PM

SweetSilverBlues: inglixthemad: I had some jerk threaten to sue me (although he was giving the wrong first name the whole time, and refused to believe I wasn't person X) over the phone once. I asked him to write down a telephone number and talk to attorney Y, my personal shark that will gladly "deal" with him regarding the manner. I also called my attorney and gave him what info I had.

Never heard from those idiots again.

If a woman named "Clarissa Jenkins" is a Farker and formerly had a phone number ending in 3174, let me just say you owe a lot of farkin' money to a lot of farkin' people and I ain't gonna pay it.

Thank you.

This is the phone number they have for Clarissa Jenkins, ergo, I am Clarissa Jenkins and must pay off her Visa, student loan, and miscellaneous other debts.

Same for Debbie Rae Maymon. I am tired of getting her calls. I am not paying her Sprint bill.
I have had my number for 11 years and this started 3 years ago. So everyday with the exception of Christmas and New Years for the past three years, I get calls for Debbie Rae Maymon.

//can you tell I am angry about this?

inglixthemad		2010-11-02 01:02:45 PM

SweetSilverBlues: inglixthemad: I had some jerk threaten to sue me (although he was giving the wrong first name the whole time, and refused to believe I wasn't person X) over the phone once. I asked him to write down a telephone number and talk to attorney Y, my personal shark that will gladly "deal" with him regarding the manner. I also called my attorney and gave him what info I had.

Never heard from those idiots again.

If a woman named "Clarissa Jenkins" is a Farker and formerly had a phone number ending in 3174, let me just say you purportedly owe a lot of farkin' money to a lot of farkin' people and I ain't gonna pay it.

Thank you.

This is the phone number they have for Clarissa Jenkins, ergo, I am Clarissa Jenkins and must pay off her Visa, student loan, and miscellaneous other debts.

Get your own shark in the water. I think I've got the tag "has a lawyer, don't f*ck with" appended to my name now. I get a new one every so often, but they stop pretty fast after 30 minutes with my attorney...

SweetSilverBlues		2010-11-02 01:06:12 PM

GalFriday: SweetSilverBlues: inglixthemad: I had some jerk threaten to sue me (although he was giving the wrong first name the whole time, and refused to believe I wasn't person X) over the phone once. I asked him to write down a telephone number and talk to attorney Y, my personal shark that will gladly "deal" with him regarding the manner. I also called my attorney and gave him what info I had.

Never heard from those idiots again.

If a woman named "Clarissa Jenkins" is a Farker and formerly had a phone number ending in 3174, let me just say you owe a lot of farkin' money to a lot of farkin' people and I ain't gonna pay it.

Thank you.

This is the phone number they have for Clarissa Jenkins, ergo, I am Clarissa Jenkins and must pay off her Visa, student loan, and miscellaneous other debts.

Same for Debbie Rae Maymon. I am tired of getting her calls. I am not paying her Sprint bill.
I have had my number for 11 years and this started 3 years ago. So everyday with the exception of Christmas and New Years for the past three years, I get calls for Debbie Rae Maymon.

//can you tell I am angry about this?

I have found the lawyer card to be extremely helpful in this situation. I ask for all of their information, and proceed to tell them that I will be giving it all to my lawyer. I do not owe the debt, therefore their attempts to collect the debt will be construed as harassment and I will sue them as such.

Has worked with everyone except Chase Bank, the student loan folks, and one whom every time I ask for their information, hangs up on me.

I will be going and sending a notarized Letter of Intent to Chase and the student loan folks next week. I'll let you know how that works out. Next step is to get Verizon to trace the anonymous douchies.

baronvonzipper		2010-11-02 01:07:36 PM

These firms will buy up old debts, and call to see if the person on the other end will cop to the debt. I never do; I say "that debt is not mine, please strike it", or "I never received the item in question". The latter is when I get a cookbook or some such in the mail, where if I don't want it, I have to pay the postage to return. As far as I am concerned, if I'm sent an item I did not ask for, then they have to come and get it, or it is mine. So far, it works. These people a slime, who prey on the weak and innocent.

SweetSilverBlues		2010-11-02 01:08:03 PM

inglixthemad: Get your own shark in the water. I think I've got the tag "has a lawyer, don't f*ck with" appended to my name now. I get a new one every so often, but they stop pretty fast after 30 minutes with my attorney...

This is what I get for clicking "Post Comment" and then leaving my desk for a few minutes.

Yup, definitely playing the legal card. It has been extremely useful.

knightofargh		2010-11-02 01:09:09 PM

GalFriday: SweetSilverBlues: inglixthemad: I had some jerk threaten to sue me (although he was giving the wrong first name the whole time, and refused to believe I wasn't person X) over the phone once. I asked him to write down a telephone number and talk to attorney Y, my personal shark that will gladly "deal" with him regarding the manner. I also called my attorney and gave him what info I had.

Never heard from those idiots again.

If a woman named "Clarissa Jenkins" is a Farker and formerly had a phone number ending in 3174, let me just say you owe a lot of farkin' money to a lot of farkin' people and I ain't gonna pay it.

Thank you.

This is the phone number they have for Clarissa Jenkins, ergo, I am Clarissa Jenkins and must pay off her Visa, student loan, and miscellaneous other debts.

Same for Debbie Rae Maymon. I am tired of getting her calls. I am not paying her Sprint bill.
I have had my number for 11 years and this started 3 years ago. So everyday with the exception of Christmas and New Years for the past three years, I get calls for Debbie Rae Maymon.

//can you tell I am angry about this?

I got harassed for several years by assholes looking for Vera and Robert Gallsby at a 513 area code number ending in 1112. If Vera or Robert are reading this, you owe a ton of money to many creditors you dead beat farkers.

/solved the problem by moving and ditching the landline

SweetSilverBlues		2010-11-02 01:09:54 PM

baronvonzipper: These firms will buy up old debts, and call to see if the person on the other end will cop to the debt. I never do; I say "that debt is not mine, please strike it", or "I never received the item in question". The latter is when I get a cookbook or some such in the mail, where if I don't want it, I have to pay the postage to return. As far as I am concerned, if I'm sent an item I did not ask for, then they have to come and get it, or it is mine. So far, it works. These people a slime, who prey on the weak and innocent.

You do not have to pay the postage on return. I keep a sharpie in my purse for just such occasions, scrawl "DELIVERED TO WRONG ADDRESSEE: RETURN TO SENDER" on the outside of it, and drop it in the mailbox. I've never gotten an item back.

People who lived here before us apparently LOVED farkin' QVC and didn't bother to change their address for a while.

Poochner		2010-11-02 01:10:06 PM

SpillyFarker: I do not understand how this is legal in any sense and it infuriates me that Chase and other entities can write the loss off as a business expense, then sell the debt to these people for collection.

They're only supposed to write off the difference. Say they sell it for a dime on the dollar, they get to write off the 90 cents. Or, if they sell it in a different fiscal year than they wrote it off completely, re-declare it as income.

/or I could be completely wrong.
//Consult your tax attorney before laughing at the IRS.
///They don't like that shiat.

SweetSilverBlues		2010-11-02 01:11:23 PM

SweetSilverBlues: baronvonzipper: These firms will buy up old debts, and call to see if the person on the other end will cop to the debt. I never do; I say "that debt is not mine, please strike it", or "I never received the item in question". The latter is when I get a cookbook or some such in the mail, where if I don't want it, I have to pay the postage to return. As far as I am concerned, if I'm sent an item I did not ask for, then they have to come and get it, or it is mine. So far, it works. These people a slime, who prey on the weak and innocent.

You do not have to pay the postage on return. I keep a sharpie in my purse for just such occasions, scrawl "DELIVERED TO WRONG ADDRESSEE: RETURN TO SENDER" on the outside of it, and drop it in the mailbox. I've never gotten an item back.

People who lived here before us apparently LOVED farkin' QVC and didn't bother to change their address for a while.

Addendum: You cannot open the package. It must be in the same condition as when you received it.

ExperianScaresCthulhu		2010-11-02 01:14:09 PM

this thread is why I have my screenname. the CRAs -- and Lexis-Nexis -- complicity in this crap is why they are not your friends, either. There's a reason WHY different social security numbers and names and addresses appear, and why such partial-matches (and no matches) are considered legitimate and valid. It's not for your benefit. You are assumed to be a deadbeat by virtue of drawing breath. You are a number, a statistic, data in the stream.

You are lucrative to them, but only if you don't hold all the cards.

Nekom and Floor9, thank you for the knowledge you both have dropped in this thread.

(personal story: i stopped being snowed by the 'pay what they say you owe if you want to be a good citizen and good christian' when a family member quit a temp job at a debt collector which was erasing penciled amounts owed on debts and directing the temps to insert much higher numbers.)

/also, unreleated: congratulations to anyone who has ever successfully forced Midland Credit Management to follow the law.
//extra special fark you to Equifax and their shiatty overseas CSRs

EatHam		2010-11-02 01:16:19 PM

GalFriday: and have been told that because I have a number in common with Debbie Rae Maymon (that is the actual name of the person that owes Sprint), I am responsible for the bill. I hate Sprint.

that's not how that works, just fyi.

Poochner		2010-11-02 01:17:36 PM

steamingpile: . farking equifax, now I am supposed to get a copy of the public records then get that to them somehow to prove to them how stupid they are.

I dont understand why they could just look at the SS number in the first place since they obviously found the filing to realize even the first few numbers do not match.

Mixed files happen way too often. Jr/Sr things screw things up royally. It's not too bad if say, it says you defaulted on a mortgage before you were born (not only because it's too damn old to be on the report in the first place), but some other stuff is a PITA, such as someone legitimately having more than one SSN (if you have a good reason you can ask for a new one). In the distant past when I had to deal with such things, though, you would never have had to provide them with jack. Why would they trust you in the first place? They have better access to public records than you do, anyway.

/it's been a long time since I had to work with that, so take it with a grain of salt.

SweetSilverBlues		2010-11-02 01:19:17 PM

EatHam: GalFriday: and have been told that because I have a number in common with Debbie Rae Maymon (that is the actual name of the person that owes Sprint), I am responsible for the bill. I hate Sprint.

that's not how that works, just fyi.

In some cases, with some debt collection agencies, that is exactly how it works. Or at least exactly how they try to convince you it works.

ExperianScaresCthulhu		2010-11-02 01:21:18 PM

Poochner: SpillyFarker: I do not understand how this is legal in any sense and it infuriates me that Chase and other entities can write the loss off as a business expense, then sell the debt to these people for collection.

They're only supposed to write off the difference. Say they sell it for a dime on the dollar, they get to write off the 90 cents. Or, if they sell it in a different fiscal year than they wrote it off completely, re-declare it as income.

/or I could be completely wrong.
//Consult your tax attorney before laughing at the IRS.
///They don't like that shiat.

Remember when folks started raising hell about receiving 1099Cs from certain collectors for the so-called 'full amount'?

mightybaldking		2010-11-02 01:22:56 PM

Fubini: it makes me wish sometimes that the supreme court could just issue a summary precedent

Sounds like you need to borrow this tool from Canada:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reference_question

GaidinBDJ		2010-11-02 01:26:22 PM

Ugh. Y'know, I realize that there are probably some people doing debt collections right, and other who do it just because it's a job and ya can't get to picky these days, but I've never had a positive experience with a debt collector.

A few years back I had a debt collector get a judgement against me (yea, it was debt I owed to the original, I just straight-up couldn't afford to pay it back). The debt collector never notified me, never made contact, and attempted to serve me at a nearly 10-year-old address, and filed the suit in same county. I never knew about it until the lein hit my bank account.

Got a lawyer, who got their paperwork, and found out they had my current address, phone number, even e-mail address *and* had reported it to a credit bureau with the correct information. They just filed at an old address so I didn't have a chance to contest it (court time is expensive). He called them in front of me, explained how illegal what they had done was, and how they were going to drop the debt, and how they were going to send *me* a check to cover the expense of the lawyer and the fees for bouncing checks because I didn't know the lien was gonna hit. Took 4 months, but they did pay up.

Now I'm dealing with another for a debt that really isn't mine over a utility bill in Montana. I've never lived in Montana. Never even visited. And the spelling on the account is different than the spelling of my name ("The utility company must have made a typo, but we *KNOW* it's really you" they explained to me). Damn scavengers.

Menace II Sobriety		2010-11-02 01:29:33 PM

I worked in collections for a while and what I found out was that by being friendly, treating people with respect, and operating within the parameters of the law, I did just fine, and didn't feel horrible about my job.

Most of the people that I worked with were in medical debt, not just "deadbeats", and I helped them to set up payment plans, sometimes for as little as a dollar a day, and as a "thank you" for setting up the payment plan (which insured that I had bonuses rolling in every month) I would not report the matter to the credit bureaus (assuming that it had not already been reported, we waited 90 days after we recieved an account before reporting in order to allow folks to set something up or to pay or dispute the account)as long as the $30 a month kept on rolling in.

I know that to some of you farkers I am the scum of society and a horrible person, but that was a job that I could hold while the economy was particularly bad in my area that allowed me to stay out of debt.

A little respect for your fellow men along with compliance with the FDCPA can go a long way. Most of these people did not WANT to be in debt, they just got dealt a tricky hand.

I even had some folks wait for me to call them back (if i had talked to them a couple of weeks ago) saying "I ran into some money and I wanted to make sure that you were the collector that got it, because treat people right".

I know it's a hard line of work, but when done CORRECTLY, it doesn't have to be as miserable as it often is these days, for all parties involved.

SpillyFarker		2010-11-02 01:30:18 PM

ExperianScaresCthulhu: Poochner: SpillyFarker: I do not understand how this is legal in any sense and it infuriates me that Chase and other entities can write the loss off as a business expense, then sell the debt to these people for collection.

They're only supposed to write off the difference. Say they sell it for a dime on the dollar, they get to write off the 90 cents. Or, if they sell it in a different fiscal year than they wrote it off completely, re-declare it as income.

/or I could be completely wrong.
//Consult your tax attorney before laughing at the IRS.
///They don't like that shiat.

Remember when folks started raising hell about receiving 1099Cs from certain collectors for the so-called 'full amount'?

What'd I miss?

SweetSilverBlues		2010-11-02 01:34:28 PM

Menace II Sobriety: I worked in collections for a while and what I found out was that by being friendly, treating people with respect, and operating within the parameters of the law, I did just fine, and didn't feel horrible about my job.

Most of the people that I worked with were in medical debt, not just "deadbeats", and I helped them to set up payment plans, sometimes for as little as a dollar a day, and as a "thank you" for setting up the payment plan (which insured that I had bonuses rolling in every month) I would not report the matter to the credit bureaus (assuming that it had not already been reported, we waited 90 days after we recieved an account before reporting in order to allow folks to set something up or to pay or dispute the account)as long as the $30 a month kept on rolling in.

I know that to some of you farkers I am the scum of society and a horrible person, but that was a job that I could hold while the economy was particularly bad in my area that allowed me to stay out of debt.

A little respect for your fellow men along with compliance with the FDCPA can go a long way. Most of these people did not WANT to be in debt, they just got dealt a tricky hand.

I even had some folks wait for me to call them back (if i had talked to them a couple of weeks ago) saying "I ran into some money and I wanted to make sure that you were the collector that got it, because treat people right".

I know it's a hard line of work, but when done CORRECTLY, it doesn't have to be as miserable as it often is these days, for all parties involved.

There's been at least two instances where we told the folks holding the original debt to go ahead and send it to a collection agency because most of the agencies that we've worked with have been reasonable in setting up payment plans.

Not ALL debt collectors are scumbag jackholes. Most of the ones we've worked with have been very reasonable.

The ones that aren't are usually the ones we don't actually owe money to.

Displayed 50 of 85 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

Redisplay/refresh comments

This thread is closed to new comments.