CCRP626

Members
  • Content Count

    1,725
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    35

CCRP626 last won the day on September 29 2016

CCRP626 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

429 Excellent

2 Followers

About CCRP626

  • Rank
    500 posts and hasn't been banned yet....

Profile Fields

  • Location
    IL

Recent Profile Visitors

1,633 profile views
  1. I'd say if you haven't read it, go ahead and make suggestions on problems you feel are present with the current FDCPA. There's also a lot of recent court cases in there you can do a word search on, such as Santander. It appears they're also trying to update and standardize the FDCPA definitions, instead of relying on court cases with varying results depending on location. Technological changes in the way we communicate since the law was written in the 70s are also addressed. Their summary- Establish a clear, bright-line rule limiting call attempts and telephone conversations: The proposed rule generally would limit debt collectors to no more than seven attempts by telephone per week to reach a consumer about a specific debt. Once a telephone conversation between the debt collector and consumer takes place, the debt collector must wait at least a week before calling the consumer again. Clarify consumer protection requirements for certain consumer-facing debt collection disclosures: The proposed rule would require debt collectors to send consumers a disclosure with certain information about the debt and related consumer protections. This information would include, for example, an itemization of the debt and plain-language information about how a consumer may respond to a collection attempt, including by disputing the debt. The proposal would require the disclosure to include a “tear-off” that consumers could send back to the debt collector to respond to the collection attempt. Clarify how debt collectors can communicate with consumers: The proposed rule would clarify how debt collectors may lawfully use newer communication technologies, such as voicemails, emails and text messages, to communicate with consumers and would protect consumers who do not wish to receive such communications by, among other things, allowing them to unsubscribe to future communications through these methods. The proposed rule would also clarify how collectors may provide required disclosures electronically. In addition, if consumers want to limit ways debt collectors contact them, for example at a specific telephone number, while they are at work, or during certain hours, the rule clarifies how consumers may easily do so. Prohibit suits and threats of suit on time-barred debts and require communication before credit reporting: The proposed rule would prohibit a debt collector from suing or threatening to sue a consumer to collect a debt if the debt collector knows or should know that the statute of limitations has expired. The proposed rule also would prohibit a debt collector from furnishing information about a debt to a consumer reporting agency unless the debt collector has communicated about the debt to the consumer, such as by sending the consumer a letter.
  2. Lengthy document to read https://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/cfpb_debt-collection-NPRM.pdf but if you have suggestions submit to Email: 2019-NPRM-DebtCollection@cfpb.gov. Include Docket No. CFPB-2019-0022 or RIN 3170-AA41 in the subject line of the email.• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Mail: Comment Intake – Debt Collection, Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, 1700 G Street, NW, Washington, DC 20552.•Hand Delivery / Courier: Comment Intake – Debt Collection, Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, 1700 G Street, NW, Washington, DC 20552. ACTION: Proposed rule with request for public comment. SUMMARY: The Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (Bureau) proposes to amend Regulation F, 12 CFR part 1006, which implements the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) and currently contains the procedures for State application for exemption from the provisions of the FDCPA. The Bureau’s proposal would amend Regulation F to prescribe Federal rules governing the activities of debt collectors, as that term is defined in the FDCPA. The Bureau’s proposal would, among other things, address communications in connection with debt collection; interpret and apply prohibitions on harassment or abuse, false or misleading representations, and unfair practices in debt collection; and clarify requirements for certain consumer-facing debt collection disclosures.DATES: Comments must be received on or before [INSERT DATE 90 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER]. https://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/cfpb_debt-collection-NPRM.pdf
  3. Yes, if you read the act if applies to situations beyond a lease including credit card debt. It's regularly updated as well which provides an excuse for your earlier statements such as the act has never applied to anyone beyond an active duty service member as you posted. The SCRA also handles situations such as a stay for a lawsuit as well as retaliation. Your advice to run to arbitration to hide an alleged debt is similar to the scare tactics used where debt collectors threaten to contact a commanding officer to get paid. Are you telling the OP threaten arbitration or pay Midland but anything else they do including seeking legal help will result in a potential Article 134 UCMJ issue?
  4. @credit2011 there was also something in the news where United Credit Recovery (UCR), a JDB was creating US Bank and Wells Fargo affidavits and other supporting documents without the banks' knowledge. http://www.startribune.com/oct-30-2013-minnesota-ag-sues-florida-debt-buyer/229901441/
  5. Maybe let the OP get with base legal before you side with Midland? Spouses have protections under the Act. Midland serving only the wife could be a convenient way to attempt to avoid the Act. Wife isn't on the database so we didn't think it applied. Word search spouse and dependent. https://www.justice.gov/crt-military/servicemembers-civil-relief-act-scra The SCRA also provides certain benefits and protections to servicemember dependents and, in certain instances, to those who co-signed a loan for, or took out a loan with, a servicemember. The term “dependent” includes a servicemember’s spouse, children, and any other person for whom the servicemember has provided more than half of their financial support for the past 180 days. https://www.saveandinvest.org/military-important-legislation/getting-know-servicemembers-civil-relief-act-scra https://www.veteransunited.com/spouse/5-ways-the-servicemembers-civil-relief-act-scra-can-help-military-spouses/
  6. They have several orders against them you'd have to read the detail but in the past orders against other banks and JDBs much of the activity is automatic if a lawsuit was filed or judgment occurred. If you have an ongoing lawsuit, an option would be to request a stay in your case while waiting for notification from the CFPB or Wells Fargo and you can file an online complaint at the CFPB site to push things along. http://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/newsroom/cfpb-takes-action-against-wells-fargo-illegal-student-loan-servicing-practices/ http://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/newsroom/consumer-financial-protection-bureau-fines-wells-fargo-100-million-widespread-illegal-practice-secretly-opening-unauthorized-accounts/
  7. You should get with your base legal office http://legalassistance.law.af.mil/content/locator.php . Like Jimmy says, they have to go through a database to meet the servicemember relief act. Midland themselves in their we do nothing that isn't consumer friendly blurb, covers military as well- https://www.midlandcreditonline.com/who-is-mcm/our-pledge/ We actively seek to identify active duty servicemembers and stop collections from those servicemembers. File a complaint with the CFPB and also see the Military Lending Act section there- http://www.consumerfinance.gov/servicemembers/
  8. https://www.prosper.com/plp/borrower-registration-agreement/ they're affiliated with Webbank who makes the loans, Prosper is the servicer. The individual investors are out of the loop as far as you're concerned, they have their own agreement with Webbank/Prosper. You can dispute on your credit report and see what the reply is before contacting Prosper directly. They may have even sold the account to a JDB. You can always send an e-mail to support@prosper.com or call, just be aware they are probably recording the call. I would however like to know what is in my families best interest as far as moving past a rough patch in our finacial lives and getting this issue resolved. Don't look at it as this must be solved before you move even if that includes agreeing to things you wouldn't normally do hoping this gets a loan approved. There are options such as renting a house in your new location temporarily. This Borrower Registration Agreement (this “Agreement”) is made and entered into between you and Prosper Funding LLC (“Prosper”). The Prosper marketplace is an online credit platform (the “Platform”) operated by Prosper. Among other things, Prosper offers access to unsecured personal loans in the form of the promissory note attached hereto as Exhibit A (the “Promissory Note”). All loans originated through the Platform are made by WebBank, a Utah-chartered industrial bank (“WebBank” or “Bank”). Collection & Reporting of Delinquent Loans. In the event you do not make your loan payments on time, Bank or any subsequent owner of the loan will have all remedies authorized or permitted by the Promissory Note and applicable law. In addition, if you fail to make timely payments on your loan, your loan may be referred to a collection agency for collection. Prosper or its agents may report loan payment delinquencies in excess of thirty (30) days to one or more credit reporting agencies in accordance with applicable law. See the “Permission to Contact” section below for additional important information.
  9. @TXPost here are a couple of threads by Texasrocker with the same basic scenario as you have. Check them out and post back if you have questions.
  10. @Paralyzed in the hallway just make clear when they try to get a settlement payment from you that it's no payment and either dismissal of the case or private contractual arbitration. Make sure you don't get into court provided mediation or arbitration. It also sounds from your post like you're giving them some leeway to provide documentation and you'll pay. That's pre-arbitration discovery which is against your agreement. Let them pay their arbitration fees and they can produce what they have there. The only thing you're in court for is to get a court order from your MTC Arb. The arbitrator is to decide everything beyond whether there is a valid agreement to arbitrate. For the small claims issue if they bring it up, you can point out in the agreement it states "any" claims resulting in an ambiguous interpretation by later stating small claims. Since you aren't sure that's the holdup, don't bring it up unless it's their objection. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contra_proferentem
  11. @Clydesmom it doesn't seem that cut and dry to me. How would a consumer know if the charge is reasonable, if the code is correct or if an internal audit is not biased?
  12. @Clydesmom what are your thoughts on medical bill auditing services? It seems like it could be useful when even an itemized list of services provided can look like a foreign language. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/03/sunday-review/the-medical-bill-mystery.html?_r=0
  13. Look around the California threads and maybe one of the Ca posters will pop in to assist if this goes to court. California (Health and Safety Code) has billing protections you should research. http://www.needhelppayingbills.com/html/laws_in_california_for_help_wi.html That said, Care Credit (Synchrony) does have JAMS/AAA arbitration and JAMS consumer rules state in California, the arbitration provision may not require the consumer to pay the fees and costs incurred by the opposing party if the consumer does not prevail. https://www.carecredit.com/YourTerms/April2016.pdf
  14. For the student loan have you contacted the Dept of Education or their servicer? They have numerous income contingent repayment plans. Even with bankruptcy, federal student loans are hard to discharge. https://studentaid.ed.gov/sa/repay-loans/understand/plans https://studentaid.ed.gov/sa/repay-loans/deferment-forbearance If you have no idea if $4,000 or $8,000 is correct, consider disputing the bill and try to get itemized records and compare the charges to the medical records. You may want to check with a legal help center, such as listed here- http://healthconsumer.org/index.php?id=partners
  15. If you plan on the various motions to dismiss, such as lack of written documents you'll want to look over the rules and probably amend your answer since these defenses are waived unless brought up when you answer or with a pre-answer motion. I do have a feeling you'll be back here in a few months after your court case keeps going asking if it's now too late to do arbitration, not to be confused with court ran version.