Having fun with a CA over out of SOL debt

[RockDaddy]

I've had ER Solutions / Convergent Outsourcing attempting to collect on a way past SOL debt, from 12/03, via telephone.

1st phone call on March 5th, demanding I pay the debt. So I play dumb and say that I would think that a debt from 2003 would probably be past the SOL in my state, but that they should send me a letter with some info I could take a look at, since I *refuse to pay* a debt like the one they're alleging.

So far, no letter. (surprised? yeah, me too) But many, many auto-robot calls, some of which I answer, some of which I don't, but NEVER getting a real person on the phone again, even when trying to call them back.

Since I want to preserve my rights, I'm sending them a quasi-DV, quasi-baiting letter seeing if they'll bite.

I'd welcome comments or suggestions on fun letter to write.

Edited March 20, 2012 by RockDaddy

[TomnTex]

When you list any phone numbers like your cell and other numbers you don't want called, you need to say and, "all calls are inconvenient to any phone including work" In this way, by providing the numbers you have baited them to call, yet you have protected your rights by telling them not to call those numbers.

[BV80]

Are they calling your cell or landline? The only way they can call your cell and leave a prerecorded message is if they have prior express consent. They would have that consent if you ever gave your cell number to the OC.

If they're calling your landline, they can leave a robomessage.

[WhoCares1000]

Wait, you have not received the initial letter 5 days after the first contact? Then you already have a violation. I would however send the DV letter to 1) Protect your rights, and 2) See if they continue to violate. Since the debt is OOS, you can have as much or as little fun as you wish

[RockDaddy]

Taking cue from Coltfan in this thread:

http://www.creditinfocenter.com/forums/collections/312624-badgered-into-stating-refuse-pay.html

I WANT to give them both my home phone AND my address. That implies that I want them to not call me at work but at home or to send me a collection letter at my house.

In actuality, I'm just reaffirming that I refuse to pay. And WHY would I do this? Because ANY further collection activity is an FDCPA violation. Period. (thanks Coltfan - this is brilliant logic)

Quoting FDCPA:

15 U.S.C. 1692© C

Communication in connection with debt collection-

CEASING COMMUNICATION. If a consumer notifies a debt collector in writing that the consumer refuses to pay a debt or that the consumer wishes the debt collector to cease further communication with the consumer, the debt collector shall not communicate further with the consumer with respect to such debt.

WhoCares1000 - You raise an excellent point - No, they have not sent me a letter within 5 days after their initial contact, which btw was a *live* person on the phone that I had a 12 minute conversation with. I intend to send a combo DV / Baiting letter, to try and coax violations out of them...

BV80 - My recent calls are *very* similar to the calls you've had lately, with a robo-dialer AND person who sounds real. I wouldn't doubt if it was the same company, or at least the same kind of technology.

Shall I post my letter? It's pretty funny overall... lol...

[BV80]

BV80 - My recent calls are *very* similar to the calls you've had lately, with a robo-dialer AND person who sounds real. I wouldn't doubt if it was the same company, or at least the same kind of technology.

Are the calls to your cell? Did you give your cell number to the OC?

[BV80]

Wait, you have not received the initial letter 5 days after the first contact? Then you already have a violation. I would however send the DV letter to 1) Protect your rights, and 2) See if they continue to violate. Since the debt is OOS, you can have as much or as little fun as you wish

Yes, it's a violation, but the problem with this is it's a he said/she said. They'll simply claim they sent the letter.

[1stStep]

Record anytime you are on the phone with them...they are good for a violation or two...

In fact, I sued them last summer and I am about to sue them for another account here in the next few days.

[Coltfan1972]

When you record them and the violate (a given of course), as tough as it will be to just hang on to the recording and keep your mouth shut, wait until you have all of their denials to what they said on the call. Wait until they answer admissions totally perjuring themselves (another given, look who you're dealing with). Then bust out the recording. Makes for a GREAT, "oh well, uh oh, I mean I did not recall that conversation."

[crash5050]

I would love to read that letter

[WhoCares1000]

Record anytime you are on the phone with them...they are good for a violation or two...

In fact, I sued them last summer and I am about to sue them for another account here in the next few days.

You mean to tell me you found a JDB that does not keep track of what Debtors sue them and/or look at Webrecon?

[RockDaddy]

Are the calls to your cell? Did you give your cell number to the OC?

BV80 - So sorry, you've asked twice now. They have called my HOME phone. In actuality I don't have a cell phone. BUT, I'm going to get one.

Am going to tell them that I use my landline for Business (which IS true), and I can prove that I occasionally have workers answer the phone and / or clients come so could possibly be a 3rd party violations.

Ideally, I'm going to grab a pay-as-you go phone and direct them to that number, so that there will be an actual record of their calls there.

This is how I'm going to write it. I'm actually borrowing from Coltfan in the previously mentioned thread, because it fits perfectly:

I am confirming your phone call to me at my work number of ###-###-####, where I stated I refused to pay. Please note my mailing address and my cell phone number.

You see - I don't *actually* tell them to call me or to send me anything at all. I'm just telling them that they called my work number and that I specifically refused to pay. Any further collection activity earns them a violation.

It's funny. I'm *dying* to get them on the phone now, and have tried to actually pick up and answer their calls. So far though, no real live person has actually picked up from the robo-handoff....

1st Step, what are these $1500 per call violations you speak of? I would love to research more of that, can you shove me in the right direction?

So - I'll post the letter that I've got. It's funny to a flaw actually. Those of you familiar with this stuff will immediately see the humour in it. lol...

Also, do I mention about the 5 days from first contact with me that they have by law to send a letter? Or just let em' hang... Of course, they could deny *every* having spoken to me, ever... Hope not though...

Edited March 20, 2012 by RockDaddy

[1stStep]

Sadly, they are not a JDB...they are just a CA. And apparently the did not remember me from their suit last summer...so I faxed them a copy of it and the check they gave me too...

[RockDaddy]

Let me preface this letter by stating that the mistakes below are intentional. My entire purpose is to goad violations out of them.

Dear Convergent,

I am confirming your March 5th phone call to me at my work number xxx-xxx-xxxx. Your collections agent Mary-Jo called me and I stated I refused to pay. On a debt that I don’t know what it is about I think anyone would have trouble paying it without a letter explaining or validating the charges. Please note my mailing address and my cell phone number.

I don’t know about this money you say I owe. In fact, if you continue to bother me, I will find you in default and persecute you to the fullest extent of the laws with my local court and better business bureau.

Sincerely,

He that Goads You

Thoughts?

I am wondering that since they intially called on what is legally my home phone number, do I need to tell them that? I do business from my home number, so figured it'd be okay if I tell them it's a biz number.... yeah?

Edited March 21, 2012 by RockDaddy

[Coltfan1972]

I like the letter but you need to make it more clear that YOU said you refused to pay. That way if they call you again, they have triggered the violation, since it will be you that had said you refused to pay.

However, don't use the word validating.

This is not a DV letter, but a letter where you flip on them their sneaky is this a refusal to pay and then let them call you again and use their own statement against them.

Always throw in a BBB threat, that does make it appear you have no clue.

[RockDaddy]

I like the letter but you need to make it more clear that YOU said you refused to pay. That way if they call you again, they have triggered the violation, since it will be you that had said you refused to pay.

However, don't use the word validating.

This is not a DV letter, but a letter where you flip on them their sneaky is this a refusal to pay and then let them call you again and use their own statement against them.

Always throw in a BBB threat, that does make it appear you have no clue.

I've reworded it, making clearer my refusal to pay and dropping the word validating. Just figured I'd try and sneak that in, without being obvious, but you're right, it's not a DV letter...

I thought my 'I will find you in default and persecute you' line was particularly funny, but that's my sense of humour obviously. Threw in the BBB as extra fodder... lol...

Other than that? Good to go?

Edited March 21, 2012 by RockDaddy

[Flyingifr]

Refusal to pay triggers no FDCPA rights. A VOD demand within the first 30 days of initial communication does. Take out the "refusal to pay" nonsense and stick with VOD. The fact that you haven't paid can be construed as a refusal - now what?

[thezoebender]

Refusal to pay triggers no FDCPA rights. A VOD demand within the first 30 days of initial communication does. Take out the "refusal to pay" nonsense and stick with VOD. The fact that you haven't paid can be construed as a refusal - now what?

What is a VOD? Vacate on Demand? And if so, how does one do one of those? I'm confused.

So he shouldn't try to pursue a refusal to pay for FDCPA violation?

Is this incorrect:

15 U.S.C. 1692© C

Communication in connection with debt collection-

CEASING COMMUNICATION. If a consumer notifies a debt collector in writing that the consumer refuses to pay a debt or that the consumer wishes the debt collector to cease further communication with the consumer, the debt collector shall not communicate further with the consumer with respect to such debt

To me it sounds like he says he told them he refuses to pay on the phone, then puts it in writing and they continue to try to collect, this would be a violation.

It also sounds like the debt is way out of SOL so sounds like a violation too.

[Flyingifr]

VOD is Validation of Debt.

Writing "refuses to pay" in their collection notes is not a violation, but with a timely VOD demand in place the simple act of asking to get paid IS a violation.

It is not a violation to ask to get paid on an OOS debt except in the Statute of Repose States (MS and WI). Suing over an OOS debt is.

The part of FDCPA you cite is the "Cease Communication" (or C&D for Cease and Desist) provision and when given to a debt collector the collector can contact the consumer once more,and that only to state what the next action will be. Frankly it makes no sense to C&D a collector on an OOS debt because if they DO Cease contact then you lose the opportunity to sue them for FDCPA violations and collect some cash. With an OOS debt you can play them like a fish on the line and then bring them home for the barbecue, with them being the one barbecued.

[thezoebender]

VOD is Validation of Debt.

The part of FDCPA you cite is the "Cease Communication" (or C&D for Cease and Desist) provision and when given to a debt collector the collector can contact the consumer once more,and that only to state what the next action will be. Frankly it makes no sense to C&D a collector on an OOS debt because if they DO Cease contact then you lose the opportunity to sue them for FDCPA violations and collect some cash. With an OOS debt you can play them like a fish on the line and then bring them home for the barbecue, with them being the one barbecued.

I agree with you, but it seems that in this situation the OP is actually trying to get them to violate the C&D in the above mentioned statute. He tells them that he stated a refusal to pay, and in fact, writes it to confirm it. Then states his address and phone number. Almost assuredly to get the CA to contact him again, which would result in a violation, no?

Are you saying that in a long past SOL debt, that one should ask for Validation? The OP mentioned that the CA hasn't sent any letter or anything, other than contact by phone. Isn't that also a violation. Curious.

So - what is the best way to deal with this. Obviously the OP wants to extract violations. Got a plan?

[Coltfan1972]

Refusal to pay triggers no FDCPA rights.

Oh yes it does !!! 15 USC 1692 C (Ceasing communications).

If a consumer notifies a debt collector in writing that the consumer refuses to pay a debt or that the consumer wishes the debt collector to cease further communications with the consumer, the debt collector shall not communicate any further with the consumer, with respect to such debt.

Everybody just always uses the C&D method. On an out of statute debt, this way is better. If they communicate with you, you got em. If they skip the communications and sue you, you got them.

In other words they are screwed either way. This is the way you turn their little are you refusing to pay right around on them and shove it up their rear.

[crash5050]

sneaky little trick I learned today, if they call you on your cell phone and you have a smart phone. Tell them to hold on a second so you can get to an area that has better reception, then open your voice recorder on the smart phone, it records the entire conversation. Be sure to ask them "OK" What were you saying? I owe you a debt? That way if htey gave you the mini miranda, it is not on the recording. Of course they say they record all phone calls, but as a systems admin, the massive amount of data storage that would take is insurmountable. I don't think they do, and I have asked them to replay a recorded conversation to me, but they couldnt.

[Coltfan1972]

VOD is Validation of Debt.

Writing "refuses to pay" in their collection notes is not a violation, but with a timely VOD demand in place the simple act of asking to get paid IS a violation.

It is not a violation to ask to get paid on an OOS debt except in the Statute of Repose States (MS and WI). Suing over an OOS debt is.

The part of FDCPA you cite is the "Cease Communication" (or C&D for Cease and Desist) provision and when given to a debt collector the collector can contact the consumer once more,and that only to state what the next action will be. Frankly it makes no sense to C&D a collector on an OOS debt because if they DO Cease contact then you lose the opportunity to sue them for FDCPA violations and collect some cash. With an OOS debt you can play them like a fish on the line and then bring them home for the barbecue, with them being the one barbecued.

You're right but what I'm saying here is that if you say refuse to pay, they are a ton more likely to contact you than if you C&D them. If you leave the lines of communication open they are also likely to violate.

It's just one strategy over the other, but both right. It's the collectors that use the refusal to pay and try to get the debtor to say that. It's a way to turn that on them.

If they call you and you did no C&D, then they will probably violate. However, why not just make that phone call to you a violation just by the placing of the call (unless it's the highly unlikely legit call to tell you their final action).

You can do a "refusal to pay" type of C&D that has a million times easier chance of a violation than a full C&D, however, they both trigger basically an instant violation.

You can get violations all the way around with both strategies. I just think a collector is a lot more likely to call or write if you just make a passing reference to "refusing to pay" and on top of that being the collector that "painted you in that corner" to make that statement.

In other words I can see the collector saying, look we got this guy, we made him admit something he did not want to admit. Let's turn the screws a little more and offer him a way to "get out of the trouble he made for himself by refusing to pay." Only it will be them getting, as I agree with you, "barbecued."

If there is any confusion, I agree 100% them writing or telling you that you're refusing to pay is not a violation, nor is trying to get paid on an OOS debt. The violation is when the consumer writes it and the collector continues to contact them.

[Flyingifr]

On an OOS debt, just tell them

"I won't pay you a penny until a Judge tells me to,and maybe not even then."

I can almost guarantee a threat to sue.

[RockDaddy]

Hey Guys,

Nice to see the discussion here. Especially over the VOD vs. quasi-C&D.

I decided to go with the semi-C&D instead of the VOD and will see how it plays out. I've also tightened up my letter, so it's not so silly, but still semi-baiting them by tossing in persecute and better business bureaus threats, but using all suggestions, including Flyingifr's; 'I won't pay a penny until a judge tells me to' which I think is brilliant...

Here's what I'm sending today:

Dear Convergent Outsourcing,

I am confirming your phone call to me at my work number, xxx-xxx-xxxx where I stated I refused to pay. Please note my mailing address and my home phone number.

If you continue to bother me, I will persecute you to the fullest extent of the laws with my local court and better business bureaus. I don’t recognize this account as belonging to me and I refuse to pay you. In fact, I won’t pay a penny until a judge tells me to.

I know my rights and you are violating me.

Now, will they bite? I dunno. I promise to post if they do.

Many thanks for all the excellent suggestions. I may actually have to break down and join this millenium and get a smart phone...

I might as well since I just got my first credit card of this millenium thanks to you guys... lol

Edited March 22, 2012 by RockDaddy