Jump to content

Call for collection after over 17 years


txshereec
 Share

Recommended Posts

When I came home today, I had a message on my answering machine from a company asking for me by my maiden name. I called it back and it was a collection company named Asset Acceptance company.

The man I spoke with, asked me if I remember buying some jeweerly at Samuels Jewerly. I asked him when. He said that their company bought the debt in 1990.

I asked him why he was calling me after 17 years. I told him the satute of limiations had way expired. He said that did not mean that the debt was excused. He wanted to know how I wanted to take care of it. I told him I wasn't going to pay it. I told him I wasn't going to do anything until I talked to a lawyer. He told me to give him the name of my lawyer and he would talk to him. I told him no. He just kept on.

I finially told him not to contact me any further on this.

My Question is: I live in Texas. It was a written contract. I never heard anything from Samuels or did it ever get reported to the Credit Bureau.

What can they do to me now?

Thank You Very Much

txshereec

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It can't even report on your CR - the DOFD is over 7 years old. The only thing you have to worry about is them trying to sue - in which case the SOL is an affirmative defense.

Legally it can't, but that doesn't mean someone won't list it then remove it when reprimanded. Keep in touch with your current CRs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They can call you and annoy you.

They can pull your credit which is more than an annoyance.

The latter is why I always recommend you DV instead of C&D on an OOS past reporting period debt.

Even if they can't report, if you just C&D they can still engage in collection activity, they just can't communicate with you directly. So that leaves them the option of placing hard collection INQs on your report every couple months, which is not good for you.

On a timely DV, doing so would be a violation of both the FDCPA and FCRA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, everything asset said was legit. They are allowed to ask you for the money until the end of time. They are not allowed to put anything on your report, as it's too old. If they were dumb enough to sue, your SOL defense would mean they instantly lose.

However, telling them to not contact you has no legal effect. You must send them a cease & desist in writing, and then they have to stop calling and writing, with a few specific exceptions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you also do a C&D in writing notifying that it is out of SOL and that any inquiries or insertions will be dealt with severely?

They have permissible purpose to pull your file for the purpose of collection. However, on a timely DV, they are not allowed to engage in collection activity. With no caselaw to back it up, my theory is that since they are barred from their only PP to obtain the report due to the FDCPA, pulling your report would violate not just the FDCPA, but also the FCRA.

You can't C&D them to not pull your report. C&D simply is cease direct communication. Any inquiry would be absolutely legal under that scenario.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just looked at my CR. It is on there. I don't know when they reported it.

The original date of contract is 1988.

I sent the DV letter to them today.

what can I do to get that off my report. Call them? Its only on one of the CRAs.

Thanks

txshereec

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You wasted your time and money with a DV letter to A$$et.

All you need to do to them is to send them a C&D telling them to go eat Maggot Droppings as the debt is timebarred and no legal recourse is available to them. They will fold and when you dispute with the CRA's, most often the TL disappears. Their claim of owning debt since 1990 kills them just as much as the SOL due to the Doctrine of LACHES (They sat on on it too long) now attached. If they were stupid enough (I know, they are) to sue you, along with your defense of the SOL, you also include Kimber v Federal Financial. The fact they rerported the TL is illegal in itself and an automatic suit if you so desire.

Though it is said that a SOL debt is still around and can be pursued by the collector, this is not always true. Remember, by actively collecting on a timebarred debt is in violation of FDCPA 807(2)(A). AND, in some states, California being one, it is illegal and a violation to "even attempt" to collect on a SOL debt. You need to read all of Tesas' collection laws as you have help there on this as Texas is a very consumer friendly state. File a complaint with the AG. They do not condone this type of activity. Do realize that to ask how you want to handle it, you responded perfectly. As to states that allow activity on SOL debt, as long as they do not threaten, they are legal. They can send letters as long as they do not step over the boundaries. Example is daily or weekly. Most often they will be bi-annual, some quarterly. The same goes for calls, yet, some have said they are not to call, as it can be, at times, intimidation, or harassment. But, if you C&D them to no calling, they are to stop. If you also tell them to stop writing, they most often do as they know they can do nothing else, except waste postage.

For those who do not know A$$et, they are one of the worst JDB's in the country. They went to court in their home state of Michigan a few years ago and convinced the judges they are not bound by the FDCPA as they now own the debt. Last I heard, this is only true in that state, maybe. Do not be afraid of them as that is their main goal. If they call, note date, time, name, and main points of conversation.

Everyone also needs to realize that the main goal of all JDB's is to collect as much as they can from each portfolio. They base their activity on intimidation and threats hoping you are part of the majority of consumers who are not aware of their rights. What is left over goes to the next one and here we go again. But, many times the account does get tossed and no further action is ever taken by a new JDB.

As to your situation as having already sent a DV, create a new letter informing them of their violation of reporting this TL due to time, etc. Site the respective statutes that apply, including state. Be sure and stress the fact that the original DOLA from OC applies in regards to the reporting period, not theirs. Look at the dates on your CR to make sure they have reaged the debt. Make it very clear that they have 10 days from receipt of your letter (date on green card will apply) to postmark a letter to you that they have closed account, deleted all TL's, and state they will not sell or transfer the account to anyone else. Failure to do so will result in your naming them as a defendant in a civil suit in the District court of your county for willful negligence of the FCRA and the FDCPA. This will include, but, not be limited to, punitive, actual, compensatory damages, and any other deemed fair and just by the court. Of course inform them of the complaint to the AG, incluidng theirs. And, make sure you include the phone call from them including names, dates, time, and main points of conversation. This will support your claim if needed later and also show you document everything.

As to disputing with the CRA's about the TL being too old, they will not delete it until they receive from A$$et. In short, the normal 30 days. Then you wonder if they will or won't. They will not delete using your words alone. Remember, most likely A$$et has reaged the debt and the original DOLA is not present. BUT, if they were stupid enough and it is, you have a chance of an immediate deletion and a 7 day turnaround on your dispute.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

retmar, I didn't read your entire post. However everything I did read was wrong. Except for reporting the old debt part.

1) Asset did not convince Michigan they were not bound by the FDCPA. They convinced judges that they were not bound by Michigan laws regarding 3rd party debt collectors. So if you live in Michigan, you can't include state law debt collector claims against them in addition to your fed law claims. Such is life. Some states don't even HAVE state law debtor protection laws.

2) Merely collecting on a stale debt is not a violation of 1692e(2)(a).

3) Collecting on time barred debt in California is not a violation of Cali law.

4) Kimber v Financial dealt with threatening to sue on time barred debts, not attempting to collect outside the courts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyway tx. Dispute to all 3 CRAs as "obsolete". If you want, you can include a sentence describing how Asset claimed the debt is from 1990 and that is way past the reporting period. Or you can save that sentence for a new dispute. If they verify even once you have them dead to rights. You already have a FDCPA violation or two merely for reporting a debt that old to the CRAs.

Send Asset a DV. Just a simple non form one. It's 99% of the time better than a C&D or "FOAD". The protections of a timely DV are better than the protections of a C&D. Also since you live in Texas, sending a C&D does not bring them under Texas law. Sending a dispute will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am really not smart about these things. What is the AG that I should report Asset to?

Why if they verify, do I hve them dead to rights?

Should I call the CRAs or write them?

It is really a wonerful country to live in when people can help other people like this. I really thank everyone for your help.

Thanks Again

txshereec

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IHateCAs, you and others have called me a liar one too many times on this matter regarding California Collection Laws.

Therefore, it is time you take the effort and read it yourself. Since our sticky reference does not work anymore, go to the California Department of Consumer Affairs site. Type in "Summary of Rosenthal FDCPA". It will display the prompt. Once you are there, scroll down to Article 2.6 and read , including each footnote. For example, one of the sentences clearly states, and I quote, "For example, it is a violation to attempt to collect a claim that is too old to be enforceable". It can't be said any clearer.

Any collector who attempts to collect on a timebarred debt is in violation of 1692e(2)(A) at the point where they threaten in any fashion, such as pay or we sue. This is true as they are misrepresenting the character, amount, and legal status. To send a letter asking or requesting payment be made is legal. If letters become too frequent, such as weekly, a violation is there as this can be considered intimidation or harassment as it is outside of a normal rotation of mailings. Even to demand payment is a violation as they are misrepresenting the status of the debt. Though, as is said, the debt never goes away, the overall thought is once there is no legal claim, the debt cannot be collected. Remember, no legal recourse, how can you force one to pay. You can't. That is why you do not waste time and money with a DV as all that is needed is to tell them to close account, delete all TL's, and go eat Maggot Droppings, or FOAD.

Regarding A$$et, what I said is the same as you, but, in a short form to save space. They claim they now own debt, therefore, are not bound by the FDCPA, thus, they are an OC. Matters not whether they are a 3rd party or not, the FDCPA relates to those who operate in the collection of delinquent debt as their primary business. This includes JDB's and CA's. If you wish to play on words, go for it. It all means the same in the end. And, if your state has their own laws, check to see if they hold the OC liable in areas of their statute. California does, and, since 2000, holds the OC liable to the Federal FDCPA as well as the state. Yes, you can read it in the Summary.

As to Kimber, if you read what I said, I was referring to court. And Kimber is a good case to reference if the collector does sue on a timebarred debt. This is in addition to your defense claim of LACHES and the SOL.

As I said in my last post, A$$et has more than likely reaged the debt, if it is being reported now. Read the TL to double check. If the TL has been reaged, the CRA's will not delete solely on your claim of being obsolete. It will have to go through the normal 30 day period by their sending the dispute to A$$et. UNLESS, you are lucky enough to still have a copy of the first notice of delinquency from the original OC, and the numbers, minus interest, match, but, again, don't get your hopes up. A collection letter from a CA of that period will not work as CA's use different numbering systems when referring to an account.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

retmar

I read it years ago. Been there, done that. Nowhere in Cali law does it suggest such a thing is illegal. Let me rephrase that. None of the "its illegal to collect on OOS cali debt" advocates has ever shown us that law. Just a document put out by the govt. The sentence everyone clings to has a footnote. The footnote references a FDCPA case where a CA was threatening to sue on an OOS debt.

It was an unfortunate and misleading choice of words. These are not the droids you are looking for.

Since your camp is making the assertion that collecting an OOS debt in Cali violates Cali law, the burden is on you. Show us one court case or show us the statute that says attempting non judicial collections on an OOS debt is barred.

Until then, you are doing a disservice to Cali citizens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.