Jump to content

You CAN teach an old collector new tricks


antiquedave
 Share

Recommended Posts

SO a collector that we successully sued on a foti violation has called the house again and left a message on the answering machine...........

Obvioulsy reading from a script, and obviously not used to reading this script

not verbatim but you get the idea

Hello.... I am calling for X if you are not X please leave the room and don't listen to this message, If you are X we will give you a moment so that you can listen to this message in private.............

(fumble fumble ruslte rustle)

This is scumbag collector this is an attempt to collect a debt, please call us about this very important message......................

(My Interpretation)

I really didn't want to call you but picked the short stick, please don't make me wear the toilet seat like Raoul had to do after we were sued because the dumb A$$ screwed up the message last time.

(sigh) no low hanging fruit here, will have to wait and see the dunning letter in 5 days and go from there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A voice mail or answering machine message is a “communication” under the FDCPA. See, Foti v. NCO Financial Systems, Inc., 424 F. Supp. 2d 643, 654-55 (S.D.N.Y. 2006); Edwards v. Niagara Credit Solutions, Inc., 586 F. Supp. 2d 1346, 1359 (N.D. Ga. 2008); Mark v J.C. Christensen & Associates., 09-100, 2009 U.S.Dist. LEXIS 67724 (D.Minn. Aug. 4, 2009); and Thomas v. Consumer Adjustment Co., 579 F. Supp. 2D 1290, 1296-97 (E.D. Mo. 2008).

Under the FDCPA, leaving a voice mail message which “identifies the consumer by name” as the intended target of the call and states “this is an attempt to collect a debt” conveys substantive information about the message, conveys more information than would be available from a hang-up or missed call and is a “communication in connection with the collection of a debt.” See, Zortman v. J.C. Christensen & Assocs., Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44982 (D. Minn. Apr. 26, 2011).

“A legal claim has been stated when a consumer alleges third party disclosure even if the debt collector has left a warning or a disclaimer that any third party should hang up the phone or not continue to listen to the message.” See, Leahey v. Franklin Collection Service, Inc. 756 F. Supp. 2D 1322- Dist. Court, ND Alabama 2010

“Calling automated telephone messages is an inherently risky method of communication and debt collectors use such a mode of communication at their peril.” See, Berg v. Merchants Assoc. Collection Div.,Inc., 586 F. Supp. 2d 1336, 1344 (S.D. Fl. 2008).

No section of the FDCPA shifts the burden to the consumer where a consumer “shall” comply with unilaterally imposed rules or restrictions, with no statutory authority, demanded by a debt collector as to how a consumer shall conduct themselves in their own home.

“The Defendant has been cornered between a rock and a hard place, not because of any contradictory provisions of the FDCPA, but because the method they have selected to collect debts has put them there. See, Leyse v. Corporate Collection Services, Inc. 545 F.Supp.2d 334 (S.D. New York 2008).

Under the FDCPA, if the offending conduct is not unreasonable is not a defense. See, Fox v. Citicorp Credit Services, Inc., 15 F.3d 1507 (9th Cir. 1994).

“The bona fide error defense in the context of a strict liability statute requires the showing of procedures reasonably adapted to avoid any such error and requires more than a mere assertion to that effect. The procedures themselves must be explained, along with the manner in which they were adapted to avoid the error." See, Wilhelm v. Credico, Inc., 519 F.3d 416, 421 (8th Cir. 2008).

This case presents the question whether the "bona fide error" defense applies to a violation resulting from a debt collector's mistaken interpretation of the legal requirements of the FDCPA. “We conclude it does not.” See, Jerman v. Carlisle, McNellie, Rini, Kramer & Ulnch LPA, No. 08-1200, 130 S. Ct. 1605; 176 L Ed. 2D 519; 2010 U.S. Lexis 3480; (April 21, 2010).

Don't ask me how I have all that where I can so easily copy and paste that so quick. Wonder if I got that same message a few months ago. ;)

Debt collectors don't run my voice mail or direct me as to how I shall conduct my affairs in my own house. I don't "take cover" for a debt collector or assure that my friends are shield from my voice mail.

My friends are welcomed in my home. A debt collector is ad unwelcomed intruder in my home and will be treated as such. Coltfan does not not "retreat" in his own home.

“It does not seem unfair to require that one who deliberately goes perilously close to an area of proscribed conduct shall take the risk that he may cross the line.” See, FTC v. Colgate-Palmolive Co., 380 U.S. 374, 393, 85 S. Ct. 1035, 13 L.Ed. 2D 904 (1965).

Unfortunately leaving me that type of message is simply not a risk that is going to payoff for them. It's going to payoff, but the other way around.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Learning something new everyday. Just unblocked 15 numbers. Let the fun begin. 8-)xdancex8-)

Get yourself a digital recorder or an app on your cell phone if that is what you use to record the calls,

keep a log of the calls and the time they called,

take a picture of your phone display to show the number and time called

as I've said I'm of the geve em enough rope persuasion:mrgreen:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately leaving me that type of message is simply not a risk that is going to payoff for them. It's going to payoff, but the other way around.

I'm not in a hurry, they can send the dunning letter, make some more calls, I will probably talk to them at some point, send the dv, get a response, send them a pail of sand and a plastic hammer, :rolleyes:

God Help me I really like the idea of sending some beach sand and a plastic hammer, maybe with the letter that says I refuse to pay the debt............

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find the more aggressive and cocky you sound when telling them you refuse to do anything, the better chance that they are going to "show you" In other words, take the bait and then cry about getting baited when they get sued for taking the bait.

Yes, that is a full admission of a consumer participating in 100% baiting and making no apologies for it or trying to spin it that it is not baiting.

"No section of the FDCPA requires an inquiry into the worthiness of the debtor or purports to protect only deserving debtors. The FDCPA protects all consumers, from the gullible to the shrewd. See, Bass v. Stolper, Koritzinsky, Brewster & Neider, S.C., 111 F.3d 1322 (7th Cir. 1997). The focus is on the debt collector's conduct, not the consumer's. See, Keele v. Wexler, 149 F.3d 589 (7th Cir. 1998).

In other words, pay the man... :<img src=:'>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find the more aggressive and cocky you sound when telling them you refuse to do anything, the better chance that they are going to "show you" In other words, take the bait and then cry about getting baited when they get sued for taking the bait.

Yes, that is a full admission of a consumer participating in 100% baiting and making no apologies for it or trying to spin it that it is not baiting.

"No section of the FDCPA requires an inquiry into the worthiness of the debtor or purports to protect only deserving debtors. The FDCPA protects all consumers, from the gullible to the shrewd. See, Bass v. Stolper, Koritzinsky, Brewster & Neider, S.C., 111 F.3d 1322 (7th Cir. 1997). The focus is on the debt collector's conduct, not the consumer's. See, Keele v. Wexler, 149 F.3d 589 (7th Cir. 1998).

In other words, pay the man... :<img src=:'>

I don't feel bad about it, its not like I have a bananna peel in my back pocket while walking around wal-mart looking for a place to fake a fall.

Its also not about the debt, it is 100% about the collectors behavior.

A counselor was telling me this week that their clients get dozens of collection calls and then added "but its not like they don't owe the money" She was an educated person who has probably never had to struggle financially in her life, she couldn't wrap her head around the idea that the debt and the collectors behavior were two different things.

They are as you say coming into YOUR home,

I've read the collector posts where they cry about being baited, cry me a river, if they were 100% following the rules and the law they wouldn't get sued but they are so drunk on the power they feel its like they can't help themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

“It does not seem unfair to require that one who deliberately goes perilously close to an area of proscribed conduct shall take the risk that he may cross the line.” See, FTC v. Colgate-Palmolive Co., 380 U.S. 374, 393, 85 S. Ct. 1035, 13 L.Ed. 2D 904 (1965).

I like that. :)%

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My wife is sort of the same idea as that councelor, if you owe the money they can do whatever. I explained several times, that they got to follow the law if they don't then they crossed the line, and you can sue them. This is not a debt with the mob we got rights and we shall enforce them, they are there to protect us, dosen't matter if you owe or not. If we didn't have rights then we should do a revolution or something, the french revolution words freedom fraternity and equality. Those standars set then are still something we must fight for.

The law "must be the same for all, whether it protects or punishes. All citizens, being equal in its eyes, shall be equally eligible to all high offices, public positions and employments, according to their ability, and without other distinction than that of their virtues and talents."

If you owe money or not is completly secondary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you owe money or not is completly secondary.

Exactly. If there is a real debt, and if you owe the debt, and if you owe it to them, then it remains as a real debt still owed.

Ask your wife if sending Guido over to knock down your door and break a couple bones is legal. If she says yeah, I'd be worried. If she says no, then scale it down and ask again. Eventually the point is that there is specific law on what is or is not allowed in collections (even though OC can go further). If she doesn't like it, she should write to her representative and senators to ask for the laws to be changed or deleted (fat chance).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did that several times, she agrees that Guido is no good, but even with the laws on her nose, she doesn't wanna hear what they are doing wrong. For example, if they call, even after I C&D every single one of them, her point of view is that you can talk with them or not is your choice, not that they are violationg the C&D, is bad. She still signs the letters I put in front of her, so I guess in the end she knows the JDB's do it wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats exactly what I've done. I video record them and the dates and how many times.

I bait them too!

The telephone reorder picks up.....

Well HELLO................................................................................................................................................I'm not here at the moment .....call back if you wish......beeeeeeeep. They think I have already picked up and automatically start their speel or it fools there recorder into thinking someone has actually picked up. Some times I get live ones and you can hear them say hello? hello? then start talking to the person next to them on the basement sweat shop they are working. I have heard some interesting conversations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't really need to bait them. This year they call me 2-3 times, that I answer and all of them were full of FDCPA violations. I bought a recorder and everything and recently I recorded a new JDB trying to collect, I didn't need to do much, he was doing FDCPA violations on his own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I don't bait them actually they called the phone number and I didn't

invite them to leave a message. So when they do that is now their problem.I already reported one of em for this to my States AG. I said I didn't invite them to leave a message and it constituted harassment. They agreed.

Didn't mean to offend. Didn't mean to take you out of context.

I work a lot of strange and long hours,and when I come home I hear these recordings.

Edited by My~Cuz~n~Vinny~
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.