willingtocope Posted January 24, 2005 Report Share Posted January 24, 2005 Okay, so in the FDCPA, it says805. COMMUNICATION WITH THIRD PARTIES. Except as provided in section 804, without the prior consent of the consumer given directly to the debt collector, or the express permission of a court of competent jurisdiction, or as reasonably necessary to effectuate a postjudgment judicial remedy, a debt collector may not communicate, in connection with the collection of any debt, with any person other than a consumer, his attorney, a consumer reporting agency if otherwise permitted by law, the creditor, the attorney of the creditor, or the attorney of the debt collector. Doesn't this prohibt the OC and / or a CA from "selling" the debt to another CA? Any case law about this one way or the other? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
admin Posted January 24, 2005 Report Share Posted January 24, 2005 I think I've seen this debated elsewhere, but can't remember exactly where or unfortunately, what the answer was. I don't think that you can nail them on this, though. If someone wants to step in and eloquently (or otherwise) explain this, by all means! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willingtocope Posted January 24, 2005 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2005 Now that I think about it a little more, since the FDCPA doesn't apply to the OC...they're probably home free...but if one CA sells it (or even assigns it to a non-affiliate) they could be liable... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leadhead Posted January 24, 2005 Report Share Posted January 24, 2005 The flaw in this argument is the following line from 805(: in connection with the collection of any debtSelling a debt is not trying to collect on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
admin Posted January 24, 2005 Report Share Posted January 24, 2005 Thanks, leadhead!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willingtocope Posted January 24, 2005 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2005 True, leadhead, but when CA#2 attempts to collect the debt, they are using info that CA#1 communicated to a 3rd party. So, CA#1 is liable... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leadhead Posted January 24, 2005 Report Share Posted January 24, 2005 But CA#1 no longer has the debt.Further, if that statute were held in the strictest meaning, how could a CA advise their employees of the debts they're supposed to collect.The statute was designed to keep CA's from embarrassing a debtor by telling their neighbors, friends, etc. about the debt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leadhead Posted January 24, 2005 Report Share Posted January 24, 2005 Thanks, leadhead!!My pleasure! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willingtocope Posted January 24, 2005 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2005 Hmmm...here's an interesting discussion:http://www.collectionindustry.com/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=4&threadid=54the remarks by "picantel" are particularly pertinent... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blrogs Posted January 24, 2005 Report Share Posted January 24, 2005 Willingtocope this is an interesting question, have you looked at FCRA Sec 611 ? it touches some base on the information of resellers, i would assume that their is more info under USC . hope i,m not intruding Still Learning Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willingtocope Posted January 25, 2005 Author Report Share Posted January 25, 2005 Not intruding, blrogs...open discussion here. I'll look at what you've suggested... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leadhead Posted January 25, 2005 Report Share Posted January 25, 2005 Willingtocope this is an interesting question, have you looked at FCRA Sec 611 ? it touches some base on the information of resellers, i would assume that their is more info under USC . hope i,m not intrudingThat deals with the reselling of credit report information by a third party, such as Privacyguard.It has nothing to do with the FDCPA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts