Sign in to follow this  
HiPriestess

OC will not settle! Refers me back to CA.

Recommended Posts

I had a Gold's gym account that was handled by ABC financial. They recently turned it over to a CA but as of today has NOT shown up on my credit report. I received a letter from the CA that said, "notice of intent to cease communications," and went on to say that "the above referenced account is being reviewed for our client's approval for referral to their attorney's office for immediate action. This communication is from a debt collector, not an attorney. This is an attempt to collect a debt..yada yadda..

They then go on to say:

Settle this matter now or:

1)Complete a suit request from which contains:

a.) verification of your employment

b.) confirmation of real and personal property ownership

c.) name and address of banks and account numbers

d.) verification of equity in motor vehicles and or boats

e.) confirmation and location of all other assets legally attachable after judgment.

2) Recommend to the client that legal action is warranted by their attorney.

3) Place this legal debt on all appropriate credit bureaus.

This debt is for 540 dollars, and the account was 3 mos past due.

Wanting to settle, I called the OC (ABC financial) and they told me they could do nothing, I had to call the collection agency. Furthermore, I was told if I paid this with the CA, they could not guarantee that my gym membreship would be reinstated.

I flat out do not want to do anything with a CA! Especially this one, after their nasty intimidation tactics. And I am most certainly positive that I will be paying for a gym membership that I will no longer be able to use.

Has anyone ever had an OC that was unwilling to cooperate with them? Perhaps I should try to settle directly with Gold's Gym? (They don't handle their finances, ABC does.)

Any advice? I don't want this to show up on my CR just after I have gotten so much cleaned up.

Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) Do NOT fill out any forms that a CA gives you.

2) Request Validation. The CA has to contact the OC to get the information, and the OC may decide to take the account back, or they will provide the information to the OC.

If they are charging you for the entire contract, and are threatening to NOT re-instate your membership for the remainder of the membership term, you will want to check with a lawyer if possible. If they are charging you for services that they are refusing to provide, you may have a cause of action against them.

I had an issue with the local golds gym franchise, when they opened, they opened without the computers to make membership cards; they never provided a membership card when they got their computers up, but still tried turning the account over to a CA for collections.

Finally after going through two owners, the current owner 'verified' with the CRAs that the account should have been deleted. The CA is still out there, but they've been evicted from the credit reports.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You had your opportunity to settle with the original client. You didn't and now it is with the agency. Many original clients, especially if they are large operations, routinely refer the debtor to the outside collection agency. That is what they are paying them for and quite frankly, they don't have time to deal with you. More than likely, this bill will have to be paid before they would re-consider you for a membership. If you don't want it on your credit report, you probably need to pay it.

I am a little concerned with all the suit language. If what you are describing is accurate, it's a little over the top, especially the"the above referenced account is being reviewed for our client's approval for referral to their attorney's office for immediate action. This communication is from a debt collector, not an attorney." An agency cannot threaten what they do not intend to do, and the gold standard for the FDCPA is that it applies to the least sophisicated (dumber than dirt) debtor. I would say the language on the letter indicates that they are trying to scare you by bringing up a lawsuit. I would show the letter to an attorney that specializes collection matters and defending debtors.

I certainly wouldn't fill the form out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, those are somewhat standard threats. Do as advised and do not answer the questions. By law, you are not obligated to this.

You can compose a letter to Gold's and clearly explain that ABC assigned your account to a CA. The CA, in turn, has threatened, harassed, and intimidated you in violation of Federal Law, and State, if any apply. You will include the verbiage that in most states, the OC can be held liable for the actions of their assignee. For this reason, if they do not recall this account from collections, and deal with you directly in settling this matter amicably, you will pursue all avenues available to you in resolving this issue, including, but, not limited to, naming them as a defendant in a civil suit. And, that complaints will be filed with the AG, BBB, and any other Federal or State Agency that governs them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I had a Gold's gym account that was handled by ABC financial. They recently turned it over to a CA but as of today has NOT shown up on my credit report. I received a letter from the CA that said, "notice of intent to cease communications," and went on to say that "the above referenced account is being reviewed for our client's approval for referral to their attorney's office for immediate action. This communication is from a debt collector, not an attorney. This is an attempt to collect a debt..yada yadda..

They then go on to say:

Settle this matter now or:

1)Complete a suit request from which contains:

a.) verification of your employment

b.) confirmation of real and personal property ownership

c.) name and address of banks and account numbers

d.) verification of equity in motor vehicles and or boats

e.) confirmation and location of all other assets legally attachable after judgment.

2) Recommend to the client that legal action is warranted by their attorney.

3) Place this legal debt on all appropriate credit bureaus.

Exciting! This is a text book example of overshadowing. Not only that, but it is a text book example of a contradiction, which violates section 807 as a misrepresentation. You now have two FDCPA violations. If they fail to file suite withing 30-90 days, that is another FDCPA violation.

This debt is for 540 dollars, and the account was 3 mos past due.

Wanting to settle, I called the OC (ABC financial) and they told me they could do nothing, I had to call the collection agency. Furthermore, I was told if I paid this with the CA, they could not guarantee that my gym membreship would be reinstated.

Big mistake. Do not contact either again unless it is in writing Certified Mail Return Receipt Requested (CMRRR)

I flat out do not want to do anything with a CA! Especially this one, after their nasty intimidation tactics. And I am most certainly positive that I will be paying for a gym membership that I will no longer be able to use.

Has anyone ever had an OC that was unwilling to cooperate with them? Perhaps I should try to settle directly with Gold's Gym? (They don't handle their finances, ABC does.)

Any advice? I don't want this to show up on my CR just after I have gotten so much cleaned up.

Thanks!

Send a debt validation letter CMRRR (and please do not send the one from this site that mentions fraud). Once they receive the letter, if they haven't yet placed it on your credit report then they cannot place it on your credit report for any of the credit bureaus until they send validation to you. For each credit bureau they list it with will be a $1000 violation (Equifax, Experian, Trans Union, CSC and Innovis). Sign up with Privacy Guard or another tri-merge credit service and watch your credit reports. Wait 90 days or until you receive "validation" (whichever comes first) then send an ITS letter demanding they drop their claim or you will sue for violations under the FDCPA. At that point, you will owe them $540 and the will owe you $1000 or up to $5000 depending on how stupid they are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

G douglass,

I've actually seen a letter resembling that on the servers of one of my law firm clients. The verbiage is ususally "may" recommend to the client further action is warranted and "could" be placed with the major credit reporting agencies where any potential creditor or employer can see for seven years, etc. In fact, MBNA uses a very similar version of that form (minus the top section) on accounts about to charge-off. There is also a form that advises the OC further collection is not warranted due to "worthless" debtor!

Do you have a sample "ITS" letter? Thnx.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, no sample ITS. I've never used one before and just now am preparing one for a non-PP for bank whose nearest branch office is 900 miles away. The courts say repeatedly that a CA cannot say you have 30 days to validate then say you have to pay immediately or pay within any time frame less than the 30 days or adverse action . That is classic overshadowing. Courts also say that any threat to sue, regardless of the verbiage it is couched in, is overshadowing, based on the least sophisticated consumer standard. A threat to sue is also a misrepresentation or unfair practice if it isn't actually carried out within a reasonable time frame like 30-90 days. They may get a pass for using "could" take legal action and other similar phrasing. In the OP's case they are asking for information to be used in court, so the threat is both implied and immienent (I think I spelled that right).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this