divemedic Posted April 5, 2005 Report Share Posted April 5, 2005 (12) The false representation or implication that accounts have been turned over to innocent purchasers for value.This is one part of the FDCPA I don't get. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willingtocope Posted April 5, 2005 Report Share Posted April 5, 2005 Well, here's some links that might confuse you even more...http://www.lawdog.com/debtcol/dc05t.htmhttp://www.artofcredit.com/phpBB2/about11209-30.htmlAgain, my gibberish to english translator is not so good, but the drift I get is that an "innocent purchaser" is someone with no knowledge of what ever legal entanglements might go along with what he bought... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xanathos Posted April 5, 2005 Report Share Posted April 5, 2005 OK, real world applications:This applies to companies that buy debts that haven't gone "bad" yet. For example, Sears selling all of its credit accounts to Citi. Citi becomes the original creditor, and has all the protections held therein. OC's are never bound by the FDCPA. They can say they aren't subject to the FDCPA and be correct.Now, what happens is collection agencies (specifically those who buy up debts outside the SOL, junk debts, etc.) try to claim themselves to be the OC after they buy up the debts so that they aren't bound by the FDCPA. Of course, in doing so, they violate a number of other FDCPA statutes, including that one--which was written SPECIFICALLY against them (which they *are* subject to, as the section you're talking about doesn't apply to them), but again, it's a "feeding off consumer ignorance" strategy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
divemedic Posted April 5, 2005 Author Report Share Posted April 5, 2005 So basically, the way I understand it is, a JDB claiming that they are a creditor and not subject to FDCPA means they are in violation?If they bought a debt for pennies on the dollar that was already delinquent, then they are not an innocent purchaser of value. By claiming that they are, they have claimed that an account was transferred to an innocent purchaser. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xanathos Posted April 5, 2005 Report Share Posted April 5, 2005 That's what it says in laman's terms, yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sultan Posted April 5, 2005 Report Share Posted April 5, 2005 OK. now we're getting some where.Go team Credit Info Center. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KentWA Posted April 5, 2005 Report Share Posted April 5, 2005 Under most state laws an innocent purchaser becomes a holder and has many remidies for collecting. However when a debt is in default there is no way to become an innocent purchaser unless fraud was involved in the sale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts