Jump to content

How to stop the CA cell phone calls


KentWA
 Share

Recommended Posts

I guess I am lucky that we live in the state that we do. We do have laws that protect us from unwanted calls.

You're lucky that you have not been on the receiving end of "call after call" and you would not be ignorant to what that means. I will explain, you receive a call at 12:00 noon, you speak to the person on the other end explain what is going on and tell them good day. At 12:30pm you get another call same

company different person, you explain that you have already spoken with their company about this matter and they get very nasty. At 2:30pm you get another call, same company different person again. You try and explain that you have already spoken with the company and that they are to not call any more. The person on the other end answers, " I asure you sir, the calls will continue until you pay your debt." .

NO! I do not believe that they have a right to call. I pay for my pnone service as everyone else. If I do not wish someone to call they should respect that request.

When things and events happen that you cannot control you should not be harrassed because you cannot pay you bills. I doubt very many people on this forum took out credit cards with the expection of not repaying the credit card.

As I have stated before, if they would work with people just a little bit there would be a lot less defaults. I think they are counter productive by raising the rates and adding all the fees that they do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're lucky that you have not been on the receiving end of "call after call" and you would not be ignorant to what that means.

You seem to like to assume things, present them as facts, and then build arguments around them (you did the same thing in post no.116 above)…other than a desire to make your argument sound more substantial, what exactly do you base that assumption (above) on?

I will explain, you receive a call at 12:00 noon, you speak to the person on the other end explain what is going on and tell them good day. At 12:30pm you get another call same company different person, you explain that you have already spoken with their company about this matter and they get very nasty. At 2:30pm you get another call, same company different person again. You try and explain that you have already spoken with the company and that they are to not call any more. The person on the other end answers, " I asure you sir, the calls will continue until you pay your debt."

Certainly the situation above would be irritating but I really don’t have a lot of sympathy to offer given than a consumer has 100% control over whether he/she answers such calls or not.

Is there some reason why you would feel obligated to answer calls from the same company multiple times a day? I mean seriously; have you ever thought about just not answering the phone?

Sometimes, it’s necessary to look within yourself and decide that you are going to take control and you’ll talk to a CA when and if and how often you decided to talk to them.

NO! I do not believe that they have a right to call. I pay for my pnone service as everyone else. If I do not wish someone to call they should respect that request.

You feelings about their right to call are beside the point…what is the point is what the law says about their right to call.

The law says they have a legitimate business right to call you; various laws also place limitations on such contact; as long as they abide by those limitations then they’ve done nothing wrong; if they don’t abide by them, then it’s up to the consumer to take them to task. Feelings about it are not part of the equation.

When things and events happen that you cannot control you should not be harrassed because you cannot pay you bills. I doubt very many people on this forum took out credit cards with the expection of not repaying the credit card.

As I have stated before, if they would work with people just a little bit there would be a lot less defaults. I think they are counter productive by raising the rates and adding all the fees that they do.

I’m sure most people, on or off this forum, don’t take out credit cards with the expectation or intent of not repaying. But regardless of their intent and regardless of what has happened that put them in the financial position they are in; when consumers do default on their obligations, it is simply not realistic to expect that the creditors aren’t going to call you and probably often.

If their calls do cross the line painted by applicable statutes, then take the appropriate action.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote:
Originally Posted by fatherof3
You're lucky that you have not been on the receiving end of "call after call" and you would not be ignorant to what that means.

You seem to like to assume things, present them as facts, and then build arguments around them (you did the same thing in post no.116 above)…other than a desire to make your argument sound more substantial, what exactly do you base that assumption (above) on?

Sure it’s redundant to have “call after call” (whatever precisely you mean by that; there is a difference between a phone call a day and 20 phone calls a day).

Because I do not like to hi jack threads I have included the RCW for the OP.

If you notice this code uses 7:30 am as a start time but when I send this RCW to a CA I leave © out and then quote the FDCPA as it is a 8:00 am start time which is when I am already gone.

RCW 19.16.250

Prohibited practices.

(12) Communicate with a debtor or anyone else in such a manner as to harass, intimidate, threaten, or embarrass a debtor, including but not limited to communication at an unreasonable hour, with unreasonable frequency, by threats of force or violence, by threats of criminal prosecution, and by use of offensive language. A communication shall be presumed to have been made for the purposes of harassment if:

(a) It is made with a debtor or spouse in any form, manner, or place, more than three times in a single week;

(B) It is made with a debtor at his or her place of employment more than one time in a single week;

© It is made with the debtor or spouse at his or her place of residence between the hours of 9:00 p.m. and 7:30 a.m.

In closing, If anyone has an elder in the hospital or nursing home you would know why it concerns me not to have to deal with unwanted phone calls Adults or not. In some cases YOU do not always have control.

As my friend has been quoted as saying many many times: " I refuse to get into an argument with an unarmed person, they will beat you down and then win with experiance " - Pauline B.

By the above RCW code everyone can decide for themselves who is correct and who is not about unwanted phone calls.

Best of luck,

Fatherof3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The law says they have a legitimate business right to call you; various laws also place limitations on such contact; as long as they abide by those limitations then they’ve done nothing wrong; if they don’t abide by them, then it’s up to the consumer to take them to task. Feelings about it are not part of the equation.

In the case of cell phones, if you tell them not to call the cell phone, they must stop, period. The legal language taken from several court decisions is "terminating an existing business relationship for the purposes of the TCPA".

For the benifit of those offering RCW or other legal references I have them and my lawyer is slow roasting these jerks not only for the calls but FDCPA and FCRA violations.

I posted here to inform others of the option when the CAs call cell phones since this often happens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the case of cell phones, if you tell them not to call the cell phone, they must stop, period. The legal language taken from several court decisions is "terminating an existing business relationship for the purposes of the TCPA".

For the benifit of those offering RCW or other legal references I have them and my lawyer is slow roasting these jerks not only for the calls but FDCPA and FCRA violations.

I posted here to inform others of the option when the CAs call cell phones since this often happens.

I thnik most people, at least those who bother to look into it, understand that calls to cell phones can be restricted; I don't think anyone here has said otherwise. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

…..

It’s interesting how you simply choose not to respond to any points I made in previous posts (even though you quote them) yet you still feel a need to post. xheadscratchx

I think the OP is aware of what Washington law says (have you not read the entire thread?) and as to the Washington law, it’s not that much more (to some extent, less) protective than the Federal statutes. More importantly, what I’ve posted has been with regards to Federal laws because that’s what most people have to rely on.

With regards to elders in the hospital/nursing home I don't see your point...to the best of my knowledge no one is required by law to ever answer a ringing telephone - the only way a person could not be “in control” of that process is if they choose not to be.

With regards to your desire not to “deal with “ unwanted calls…while an understandable desire (who doesn't want to stop "unwanted" calls???); desire is not the issue…what the law says is the issue and if “unwanted” crosses the line into “harassment/abuse” and/or you are dealing with collectors who are refusing to follow the law then, as I’ve said many times, take action.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

More info on this subject, I found a very recent court decision that says the FCC oversteped their authority in their declaritory ruling that allowed CAs to send pre-recorded messages to debtors cell phones. The court said that the FCC ruling was “manifestly contrary to the plain language of the statute.”

It is Leckler v. CashCall:

http://www.snllp.com/events/resources/docs/Leckler%20v.%20CashCall,%20Inc.%20(TCPA%20-%20prior%20express%20consent).pdf

CashCall is attempting to appeal and oral arugements are to be heard October 31st.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

....u wont get class cert

... all cases ive seen in my research have denied class action status

.

...by the way, not all jurisdictions have accepted the fcc ruling that confers "ebr" to c.a.'s just because u have provided a phone number on an application to an original creditor

...

did you gloss over this?

and howz that class cert coming? what, it wasnt approved? u mean the phone calls to you are not representative of the class?8-)

...the only class certs approved that ive seen so far are for junk faxes, not phone calls..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

did you gloss over this?

and howz that class cert coming? what, it wasnt approved? u mean the phone calls to you are not representative of the class?8-)

...the only class certs approved that ive seen so far are for junk faxes, not phone calls..

Class Cert has been delayed due to our finding in their discovery materials that they did not disclose everything. However we also found that they classify all accounts where the cell phone was ported to a different carrier and specificly call those numbers. Bingo, calls to me are exactly representitive of the class. This is exactly how we alleged.

As you know the courts move at a smails pace and it will now likely be 2009 before we get to the class cert.

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.