Fats Posted April 17, 2007 Report Share Posted April 17, 2007 How many times can a debt be sold. The first collection agency wanted to take me to court(court mediation), I validated debt and they withdrew, now I am getting another collection agency with the debt. Can they keep doing this for years and years. The first CA could not validate had no proof so I am hoping the others have no proof too. I keep validating, are they just hoping I screw up.thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retmar Posted April 17, 2007 Report Share Posted April 17, 2007 Yes, the debt will remain "in circulation" until someone gives up or they cause you to pay. This is why you should always say in your letters to a CA/JDB that they must close, delete, and not sell, transfer, or reassisgn to anyone. then, if you do get another CA/JDB, you some more ammo to play with.Remember, a JDB relies solely on the percentage of population who do not know their rights, as the majority of them will cave and pay. The uncollected ones go back in the pile to sell to the next bidder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hawaiiguy Posted April 17, 2007 Report Share Posted April 17, 2007 This is why you should always say in your letters to a CA/JDB that they must close, delete, and not sell, transfer, or reassisgn to anyone. then, if you do get another CA/JDB, you some more ammo to play with.I had not heard about this little tidbit above. What kind of ammo, etc? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadynRed Posted April 18, 2007 Report Share Posted April 18, 2007 Well, there's no way you can prevent them from re-selling, trasferring or re-assigning a debt, that would be restraint of trade and you'll never win on that. The SOL in OH is FIFTEEN YEARS, so yes, they'll keep trying and re-selling and trying again for that long and more. Old SCAMCO once contacted people for debts that had been 25 years old and more !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retmar Posted April 20, 2007 Report Share Posted April 20, 2007 LadynRed, I will always agree with you, but, this time, you raised a flag. My thoughts, regarding the sale of "debt" between one CA/JDB and another CA/JDB, is that if the first offers for sale a portfolio containing debt that is assuredly "uncollectible" for whatever reason is deceitful, as the first has absolute knowledge of this. True, only the buyer has recourse, but, at the same time, a consumer can argue this as deceitful to prove credibility. And, if argued properly if the second CA/JDB did file on the consumer, the consumer could, in their defense, argue they were under the impression all was resolved, such as a SOL debt. I'll look through the UCC and see if anything pops up about this and let all know. I say this as in the gaming industry, we had to really be on our toes, not just for the control board, but, all other laws and statutes. An example is that if we offered a specific percentage of payback, we had better have machines that do. Understand, this does not mean each and every machine, we just had to comply or we were being deceitful, dishonest, and use your imagination, which was actionable, by both gaming and the customer. Rereading my last post, I probably should have clarified more in what I meant. To add, in our repair, I did use this in all communications and have heard nothing from anybody since, which was over 3 years ago when I finished. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willingtocope Posted April 20, 2007 Report Share Posted April 20, 2007 The problem is...the debt IS still collectible. Only WI and Mo(?) make it illegal to try to collect on a time-barred debt. In all other states, just because a debt is SOL, doesn't mean they can't try to collect it. In fact, if they take you to court and you don't show up, even SOL doesn't do you any good.Retmar obviously I'm guessing, but I'm guessing your letters worked because the JDB's decided to move on to someone who would require less work Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retmar Posted April 21, 2007 Report Share Posted April 21, 2007 Again, in California, it is a violation to even attempt to collect on a debt too old to be enforceable. You can all read this by clicking on the second post in the sticky regarding California law. Scroll to Article 2.9 and read. Do include all footnotes in your reading.Willingtocope, that may well be true. But, we must all remember that more times than not, any attorney worth their weight "creates a theory" as a way to support their claim. Then you add the mentality of most who work in the collection industry. Though, as LadynRed pointed out that you may not win for yourself, if you file on it, the simple fact you planted a thought in someone's "gray matter" may be all that is necessary. To add, a couple of years ago, I started a thread about the continued reporting of a timebarred debt being illegal, as, by my theory, is true. But, is it? Even CaLawyer said it was a good arguement. Thus, by creating a theory to someone can work better and more to your advantage than waiting to be sued and hope it will work. Think about it this way. How many consumers pay a timebarred debt because a collector said they must or else? The collector placed a thought into their gray matter.A thought for everyone: "I send you out as sheep in wolf country, be wise as a serpent, and harmless as a dove". You'll win most every time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
direred Posted April 21, 2007 Report Share Posted April 21, 2007 Again, in California, it is a violation to even attempt to collect on a debt too old to be enforceable. You can all read this by clicking on the second post in the sticky regarding California law. Scroll to Article 2.9 and read. Do include all footnotes in your reading.If you actually read the cases involved, it's only a violation if they try to sue.They can collect as long as they like otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retmar Posted April 22, 2007 Report Share Posted April 22, 2007 direred,Get off of your BS regarding cases. What is written in the summary is exactly how California acts on the statute. Read the summary.QUOTE:Article 2.6(2)"It is also a violation to misrepresent a debt's character. For example, it is a violation to attempt to collect a claim that is too old to be enforceble."Federal Reference: FDCPA 807(2)(A)Sate Reference: CCC 1788.14 or CCC 1788.17 (to cover all into one)Where does it only refer to being true if a suit is filed? No where! Not even in the footnotes. The only mention is Kimber who's sole purpose is for reference regarding the filing on a timebarred debt. Understand beyond any doubt. During my repair, the involved CA was nailed and fined for this very reason, and no suit had been filed. OC got a "letter". I recently filed a complaint with my DA's office for this same claim, for a friend, and they are working it. Yes, you can file with your DA's office or the AG. That is also in the summary.I'll say it again to everyone, do not rely on each and every case law you read from any court other than the Supreme Court. Case in one district will not always hold up in another. Most times, if at all, it will only be used for discussion. Example is A$$et's claim about ownership. That only stands in Michigan. Does it mean another court will not rule based on another court's decision? Of course not, but, the rule must hold up to the respective state's laws and constitution. Remember, anyone coming into your state from another state, such as a JDB, are required to honor, with full faith and credit, the laws of sister states, but, only so long as the law of the sister state is in conformity with your state's laws.I won't respond to this thread anymore. Anyone who has a question about California, send me a PM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts