CA harassment

[bjTX]

What would constitute a harassment with phone calls by a CA? Would a call every day constitute a harassment, if a roommate says I am not here?

Strange thing it is a different person calling every time by the same CA! Is that normal?

bj

[swirlgirl]

Here's the legal definition of harassment from the FDCPA:

§ 806. Harassment or abuse [15 USC 1692d]

A debt collector may not engage in any conduct the natural consequence of which is to harass, oppress, or abuse any person in connection with the collection of a debt. Without limiting the general application of the foregoing, the following conduct is a violation of this section:

(1) The use or threat of use of violence or other criminal means to harm the physical person, reputation, or property of any person.

(2) The use of obscene or profane language or language the natural consequence of which is to abuse the hearer or reader.

(3) The publication of a list of consumers who allegedly refuse to pay debts, except to a consumer reporting agency or to persons meeting the requirements of section 603(f) or 604(3)1 of this Act.

(4) The advertisement for sale of any debt to coerce payment of the debt.

(5) Causing a telephone to ring or engaging any person in telephone conversation repeatedly or continuously with intent to annoy, abuse, or harass any person at the called number.

(6) Except as provided in section 804, the placement of telephone calls without meaningful disclosure of the caller's identity.

[nascar]

That would be covered under 15 USC 1692d(5) -Causing a telephone to ring or engaging any person in telephone conversation repeatedly or continuously with intent to annoy, abuse, or harass any person at the called number.

The operative word is intent. You would need to prove that the calls were made with the intent to harass and not just to collect a debt. Prior case history and the reasonable person standard tell me that you'll have a tough time with this claim.

[Robert Nashville/Savannah]

There are two different laws (and Federal agencies) involved in an issue of “telephone harassment”.

As Swirlgirl pointed out, since this is a collector calling, the FDCPA’s definition of harassment (overseen by the FTC) applies; there is also the TCPA (overseen by the FCC) which would apply to all telephone harassment (whether a debt/CA is involved or not).

However, a phone call a day is unlikely to get anyone excited about a charge of harassment …that’s even more true if they aren’t getting to talk with you (and just calling and asking for you)...if they were calling multiple times a day and screaming at whoever answers and/or calling at 2AM or other such activities; then you might have enough to get some traction.

Moving on; I assume this collector is the same one you posted about here:

….

As was indicated to you in that thread, this is not something to mess around with…the DOE can screw you over big-time and will if you aren’t careful.

That said, I really suggest you concentrate on working out an arrangement to get your loans rehabbed rather than worrying about side issues.

[LUEser]

If only I had a photographic memory.

I remember a thread on here that does in fact show that some states limit the amount of times a CA can all in a week regarding a debt.

Unfortunately, I don't remember what states offer such protection.

[debtorshusband]

However, a phone call a day is unlikely to get anyone excited about a charge of harassment …that’s even more true if they aren’t getting to talk with you (and just calling and asking for you)...if they were calling multiple times a day and screaming at whoever answers and/or calling at 2AM or other such activities; then you might have enough to get some traction.

I agree with Robert here.

DH

[Robert Nashville/Savannah]

If only I had a photographic memory.

I remember a thread on here that does in fact show that some states limit the amount of times a CA can all in a week regarding a debt.

Unfortunately, I don't remember what states offer such protection.

Washington has such a law and there may be a handfull of other states that have something similar but it's definetly not the "norm" that the specific number of calls is regulated.