Sueing debt collectors

[infinity]

I first posted in this forum about a year ago. I mostly just read, and learned. My other half has filed for Chap. 13.

I, on the other hand have not filed. I don't own anything for debt collectors to take. I will however file chap. 7 when I can afford to do that.

I have started sueing debt collectors to pay for my bk attorney. So far I have collected from one and I'm waiting on a check for the second.

The reality is -- it's much easier than I thought it would be.

The first one was Penn Credit Corp. All I gave to my attorney was a call log with dates and time of call. I also noted the times I had told them to stop calling. They were calling a business line. We ended up with $500 for that one.

The next one wasn't quite as easy as they would not give me the name of their business or even a mailing address. I was able to track them down. They were ARS National Services, Inc. dba Associated Recovery. I am now waiting for my settlement check from them, for $500. Then I have another I'll go after.

I have come to the conclusion that these bottom feeders expect to be sued and they probably have settlement costs in their operating budget. So I'll keep sueing them until I can afford to pay a bk attorney.

I've also discovered that they even lie to each other. I recently got a call from a different collector concerning the same debt that Penn Credit has already been sued for. I asked that collector if PC had told them I sued them and they hung up on me. They haven't called back again. That debt is likely on the table for some other scum bag to buy.

FWIW - I didn't just decide to walk away from CC debt. I'm 63 years old and had always paid my bills on time. I never even carried a balance on my CC's and paid them in full each month. "Stuff" happened and I fell behind. Not even one of them would agree to work with me and lower the interest rates and late fees. Instead, they sold the accounts to debt collectors and you all know the rest...

[JustaTexan]

The first one was Penn Credit Corp. All I gave to my attorney was a call log with dates and time of call. I also noted the times I had told them to stop calling. They were calling a business line. We ended up with $500 for that one.

How exactly did you tell this CA to stop calling you? By mail, by phone? Did you DV them and ask for all communication in writing?

[lovebug5]

I have started sueing debt collectors to pay for my bk attorney. So far I have collected from one and I'm waiting on a check for the second.

Although I can totally understand that everyone's situations are different and different circumstances control each individual's downfall, I completely disagree with the mentality behind the above statement. As a personal opinion without any direct offense to the OP, I feel that this statement just continues a vicious cycle which results in a deeper hole being dug instead of climbing out of the one that you're already in.

[deltadawn]

Lovebug - could not have expressed it better. You hit the nail right on the head. As you mentioned, everyone's circumstances are different. There are circumstances which you create and other's that you have no control of. Accepting personal responsibility is a choice.

[lovebug5]

I do believe that the OP has expressed personal responsibilities for his/her past CC debts, which is always an incredibly important step. However, I do believe that robbing Peter to pay Paul is never a good idea - and although some would argue that taking CA's to court isn't robbing them by any means, taking them to court for the sole purpose of making money to pay off a BK attorney isn't using the laws created to help you out in the manner in which they were intended.

I'm curious to know who the OP's attorney is and whether or not that attorney is working on a contingency basis. Most NACA attorneys that I have spoken with about my own issues are hesitant enough to take on solid cases without a retainer, let alone multiple cases for $500 settlement amounts. And I, personally, would find it incredibly hard to believe that no one is raising an eyebrow in this situation.

[Robert Nashville/Savannah]

As my hero; Lieutenant Worf once said, “if they haven’t been tested in battle, their reputation is meaningless”.

With all due respect to the OP, I suspect your victories have come not because of any great legal prowess or even because you were “right” but simply because it wasn’t worth the time/effort/money of the plaintiff to fight you; so they paid you go away.

If you ever come up against a plaintiff who feels it is worthwhile to fight, you may find that your plan to pay for bankruptcy from your “winnings” will take a big step backwards.

Speaking of bankruptcy; why bother/spend the money??? If you are essentially judgment proof then there is nothing for you to actually gain by filing for bankruptcy other than to tarnish your credit history further. It is also very important to remember that bankruptcy only addresses the symptoms; it never addresses the problem.

If whatever brought you to this state hasn’t been addressed then chances are good that you’ll be back in the same position rather quickly; and this time without bankruptcy to fall back on.

[smurfette in nyc]

Speaking of bankruptcy; why bother/spend the money??? If you are essentially judgment proof then there is nothing for you to actually gain by filing for bankruptcy other than to tarnish your credit history further.

I couldn't agree more with RN. I wonder if the OP has many outstanding debts that are within SOL. If he is still working, perhaps he is afraid of being sued himself, and having his wages garnished?? Other than that, I too don't understand the purpose of filing for BK.

As for suing debt collector's, my opinion is that they should be brought to task each and every time they break the law. Whether through negligence, or willful non-compliance, I advocate consumers to take action against these highly unethical creatures when they violate the law!

[Robert Nashville/Savannah]

...As for suing debt collector's, my opinion is that they should be brought to task each and every time they break the law. Whether through negligence, or willful non-compliance, I advocate consumers to take action against these highly unethical creatures when they violate the law!

I agree.

I didn't want to give the impression that I think consumers shouldn't take CAs to task when they break the law; my point was that it is not always as easy a proposition as the OP has apparently experienced so far.

[lovebug5]

I agree.

I didn't want to give the impression that I think consumers shouldn't take CAs to task when they break the law; my point was that it is not always as easy a proposition as the OP has apparently experienced so far.

Agreed as well. It honestly makes me question the OP's attorney. Although I appear to be somewhat adverse to legal matters, I firmly stand behind the mentality of having well-documented reasons if pursuing legal remedies.

[JustaTexan]

However wrong the OP may very well be I'd still like to know how he/she accomplished sueing them for calling him/her without them counter sueing him/her right then for the debt? I'm curious! And how OP won the case.

[smalt]

An account was sold to Redline Recovery. I DV'd them after I received the dunning letter, and also wrote on the DV letter that they should not contact me by phone. They are continuing to call and have yet to send validation. I have recorded the calls but have no way of verifying the date that i received the calls. Do I have any recourse against them?

[Robert Nashville/Savannah]

Is there a reason why you are hijacking this thread with an unrelated matter?

If your DV was timely and you can prove it then they are violating the FDCPA for continuing collection activity without providing validation.

[Flyingifr]

However wrong the OP may very well be I'd still like to know how he/she accomplished sueing them for calling him/her without them counter sueing him/her right then for the debt? I'm curious! And how OP won the case.

Simple - you cannot countersue for the debt.

[JustaTexan]

Simple - you cannot countersue for the debt.

Really? So if I was felling froggy and went and sued this CA who has called me almost everyday despite the fact that they received my CMRR dv/limited C&D letter, they can't counter sue me? I was not aware of this.

[Robert Nashville/Savannah]

Really? So if I was felling froggy and went and sued this CA who has called me almost everyday despite the fact that they received my CMRR dv/limited C&D letter, they can't counter sue me? I was not aware of this.

Flying is playing with termonology here

Yes...trust me...a creditor (a CA has no standing in/of themselves to sue you) can sue you to enforece the debt whether or not you sue them.

[JustaTexan]

Yeah I thought that might be too good to be true!

I would still like to know the specifics of the OP's case though. OP, where ya at?

[nascar]

Simple - you cannot countersue for the debt.

Yeah, but they sure can file a separate action. Probably shakes out about the same, I reckon.

[Florida_Bronco]

However, I do believe that robbing Peter to pay Paul is never a good idea - and although some would argue that taking CA's to court isn't robbing them by any means, taking them to court for the sole purpose of making money to pay off a BK attorney isn't using the laws created to help you out in the manner in which they were intended.

I disagree with that. If a collection agency violates the FDCPA the consumer should do anything in their power to fight back, including filing lawsuits if needed. What the consumer spends their violation money on is a totally irrelevant issue.

[Robert Nashville/Savannah]

Where/how winnings are spent isn't irrelevant.

I would suggest that if you have to sue debt collectors in order to have enough money from your "winnings" to pay a bankruptcy attorney then you have far bigger problems that FDCPA violations and likely, other areas of your finances that deserve your time and attention.

The whole premise of the OP’s post about how “easy” it is to sue and win is irresponsible – even a “small” CA firm has far more resources to fight a lawsuit than most individuals (especially an individual with money problems); take on the wrong one and/or for the wrong reason and the consumer will get crushed and suddenly their “plan” is worthless.

Where, when, and how to fight a battle is something that should be done with a great deal of thought; including taking the consequences of loosing into consideration.

[Flyingifr]

There is nothing sinister about earmarking your FDCPA suit winnings for a particular purpose, be it a BK attorney or a toy. The toy my nice former creditors bought for me is in my Avatar - see it?

I agree that if the OP is using FDCPA suit proceeds to finance a BK the OP has some problems that are a bit more serious than the FDCPA violations, but one does not preclude the other.

[Florida_Bronco]

Where/how winnings are spent isn't irrelevant.

Yeah it is. The FDCPA doesn't state you can be awarded damages depending on how you want to spend that money. It DOES say you can be awarded up to $1000, legal fees and any actual damages you can prove.

I would suggest that if you have to sue debt collectors in order to have enough money from your "winnings" to pay a bankruptcy attorney then you have far bigger problems that FDCPA violations and likely, other areas of your finances that deserve your time and attention.

Agreed, but that is the OP's problem, not ours.

The whole premise of the OP’s post about how “easy” it is to sue and win is irresponsible – even a “small” CA firm has far more resources to fight a lawsuit than most individuals (especially an individual with money problems); take on the wrong one and/or for the wrong reason and the consumer will get crushed and suddenly their “plan” is worthless.

Where, when, and how to fight a battle is something that should be done with a great deal of thought; including taking the consequences of loosing into consideration.

Disagree (for the most part) with this one too. The FDCPA is pretty clear on what is and what isn't consider a violation, and if the consumer can prove the violations took place there really isn't much in the way of defense for the collection agency.

This kind of ties into what you said in an earlier post where you suggested that these collection agencies settle just to make us go away. While that may be true in some cases, I'd bet money that more often than not they settle because they know the consumer has them dead to rights on a violation(s) and don't want to waste money defending a lawsuit they'll likely lose.

[Florida_Bronco]

There is nothing sinister about earmarking your FDCPA suit winnings for a particular purpose, be it a BK attorney or a toy. The toy my nice former creditors bought for me is in my Avatar - see it?

I agree that if the OP is using FDCPA suit proceeds to finance a BK the OP has some problems that are a bit more serious than the FDCPA violations, but one does not preclude the other.

Agree 100%

[Robert Nashville/Savannah]

....

There is a hell of a lot more to personal finance that the FDCPA and FCRA - people either understand that or they don't (usually at their own peril).

My posts in this thread had nothing to do with the FDCPA; consequently, your “disagreement” with me based on what the FDCPA contains completely misses the point.

Anybody who approaches a lawsuit with a caviler “it’s easy – anyone can and should do it” attitude like the OP expressed is a disaster looking for a place to happen…recommending others have the same attitude is reckless and a great recipe not only for others to be disappointed but for some bad case law to be made as well.

[willingtocope]

Does it matter to anyone that the OP hasn't posted again since the OP?

Looks like we've got another soap box parade going on....

Maybe we should just drop it until (or if) the OP asks for some actual advice.

[Ravenous Wolf]

Anybody who approaches a lawsuit with a caviler “it’s easy – anyone can and should do it” attitude like the OP expressed is a disaster looking for a place to happen…recommending others have the same attitude is reckless and a great recipe not only for others to be disappointed but for some bad case law to be made as well.

I personally think that part of this thread has completely missed the point.

There is a reason to why it's "easy" to sue.

But first, there are two questions to ask:

1. Have you ever been harassed by a pig-eyed lying sack of [EXPLETIVE DELETED] bill collector?

2. Have you personally known a pig-eyed lying sack of [EXPLETIVE DELETED] bill collector, like as a friend or an acquaintance?

The reason I bring up those two questions is because these kinds of bill collectors break the law in every kind of outrageous fashion. One friend of mine would tell debtors that since he had their address that he was going to kick down their front door and kick their [EXPLETIVE DELETED] if they didn't pay up. And he loved getting a hold of women because he knew exactly how to make them cry. Another private investigator who worked down the hall from me years ago used to brag how he spends 95 percent of his day lying on the phone and he showed me a lot of his tricks to scare or manipulate people, especially the debtor's parents (like saying how their kid would be going to jail, etc).

As for myself, I have been harassed by these kinds of dirt bags and they pulled a lot of outrageous stunts, especially when I was at work.

For someone that is determined, they can document all of these kinds of actions that blatantly violate the law. If there is enough documentation, these scum bags don't have a leg to stand on.

Now as a disclaimer, I am only referring to the bottomfeeders. They are the outfits or even individuals who buy this stuff for pennies on the dollar and it comes with absolutely no or very little documentation. Even the collection agency trade groups admonish collection agencies who buy these kinds of debts.

There are a number of collection agencies that don't do this kind of crap but then there a plenty of small time outfits and individuals who do...