kutuzov

Zombie Debt on my mail box!

Recommended Posts

So I got a little surprise in the mail. A letter from Midland that they now own an old debt from a Washington Mutual cc, that was previously owned by Asset Acceptance. It the usual you got 30 days to dispute. All right I'll send my DV letter when I get home. Anyway, I also read that Midland bought Asset. Many moons ago I DV Asset, and then send a cease and desist, so since midland bought asset, does that transfers over?

Well I might dv them or not, since maybe I can get some TCPA violations and have some fun. My cell phone line is from 2013, so any calls will be a violation, no consent possible there.

Not really in the mood to mske them come to the Lion, but is tempting.

Should I just DV them and then cease and desist them, or dv them only ... to be or not to be, what you guys recommend???

Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I could just DV them and wait for the sheep to come by to the Lion, I might get lucky and have a violation just on the DV.

 

My opinion:  if they can't sue you send a cease and desist and move on.  If they do violate after that:  then sue them.  The days of the large JDBs like Midland committing flagrant violations are long gone.  In the past consumers were not as well versed in the collection laws and their rights as they are today.  Just as we have stepped up our game so have the collectors.  They stop reporting before suing so there are no counter claims, treat the "all calls are inconvenient" as a full cease and desist, and generally take the safe approach these days.

 

The other reason is I am not a fan of weakening the claims that legitimately harmed consumers have from actual abusive and egregious violations by baiting them to break the law with vague letters just to file a suit to get go away money.  Our strength is in the high road not in sinking to their level.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No high road for me if it is a JDB. I'm of a feeling if the OC didn't want to pursue the debt, then they should give the debtor first dibs on buying the account. It's a money game, I'd much rather have the money than some corporation that steals money legally. ( yep I think it is extortion and theft, legally)

If I default on an OC, that is another story, by all means sue me and get some money back, I do owe you.

But at the same time don't add so many fees that it is impossible for me to pay you back.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

No high road for me if it is a JDB. I'm of a feeling if the OC didn't want to pursue the debt, then they should give the debtor first dibs on buying the account. 

 

This is where your logic fails.  The OC DID give the debtor first dibs.  MULTIPLE times.  It is typically at least 6 months before a charge off and the account is sold.  SIX months with NO payments.  The majority of debtors don't even bother trying to contact their creditors and settle.  It isn't a case where the creditor doesn't want to pursue it but months of efforts are fruitless for payment and they need to make money on the account some how.  

 

Now if you want to argue there should be a law in place that consumers have to be notified before their debts are sold to another party so that they can settle the account prior, that is a whole different argument.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll send a DV and just wait and see. I'm not really looking to sue them, but I still got that bad itch about debt collectors. For this same debt they where calling me systematically every Sunday at 8 am for about a month. That and other abusive tactics made me start searching for info. I send Asset a c&d back when the account was within SOL, I would rather get sue than getting phone calls the day I could sleep in, didn't happen, also they did send me a nice looking letter with a lawyer header but I DV them and never heard back from them, or this debt until yesterday, I even forgot about. Anyways no need to fight just stay calm and share your thoughts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The days of the large JDBs like Midland committing flagrant violations are long gone.  In the past consumers were not as well versed in the collection laws and their rights as they are today.  Just as we have stepped up our game so have the collectors.  They stop reporting before suing so there are no counter claims, treat the "all calls are inconvenient" as a full cease and desist, and generally take the safe approach these days.

This is actually good news, it was their complete disregard of the law and constant harassment and abuse, that made me become an informed consumer, and filed a couple FDCPA law suits in the process. I would have traded my acquired knowledge for this any day. I guess they got too many people going after them and started behaving.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes Clydesdale mom,but they usually don't have offers for settlement, just collection notices. When they do offer to settle, it is usually for more than 50%. But yet they will sell it for under 10%. Sometimes for 3-5%. I'm not saying they should let consumers default and the consumer waits until they can buy it for 5%, but make an offer, or take me to court. I just dislike the whole JDB business model. Maybe because I was sued by one for a debt that was already settled with the OC.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I just dislike the whole JDB business model. 

 

If it weren't for consumers defaulting (even without medical debt or a recession) this business model wouldn't exist.  It is consumer's behavior that drives it.  

 

I'm not saying they should let consumers default and the consumer waits until they can buy it for 5%, but make an offer, or take me to court.

 

There are MANY opportunities for a settlement prior to being sued or the debt being sold. NOTHING requires that the consumer wait until the creditor sue or sells to try to settle.  The creditor or the consumer can offer any percentage they want.  It isn't cut in stone and is a negotiation until a deal or impasse is reached.  

 

Again, the reality is the debt is sold after months or years of trying to collect and getting NOTHING.  NO call, no payment, no negotiation, no contact at all from the debtor.  Is there a smaller percentage that tries to settle and can't reach a deal?  Sure.  

 

When they do offer to settle, it is usually for more than 50%. 

 

Then explain exactly what is a "fair" percentage when a consumer uses a credit card to run up thousands of dollars in debt  and the creditor hasn't been paid in 6 months.  WHY should the original creditor settle for the same huge cut they take when selling it?  The reason they can sell for pennies on the dollar is the JDB is assuming a large risk that they never collect.  That is why it is called JUNK debt.  

 

Yes Clydesdale mom,

 

Not sure why you felt resorting to juvenile name calling was necessary or needed but what ever.  It doesn't make you look clever, witty, or savvy.  It just makes you look petty when you can't defend against the logical opposition I took to your suggestion to the OP.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Not sure why you felt resorting to juvenile name calling was necessary or needed but what ever.  It doesn't make you look clever, witty, or savvy.  It just makes you look petty when you can't defend against the logical opposition I took to your suggestion to the OP.

 

Nobody that has been here for any small amount of time would come up with any of these views for Shellieh . I just figured it was her I-pad changing her words as usual, and am guessing it was unintentional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My opinion:  if they can't sue you send a cease and desist and move on.  If they do violate after that:  then sue them.  The days of the large JDBs like Midland committing flagrant violations are long gone.  In the past consumers were not as well versed in the collection laws and their rights as they are today.  Just as we have stepped up our game so have the collectors.  They stop reporting before suing so there are no counter claims, treat the "all calls are inconvenient" as a full cease and desist, and generally take the safe approach these days.

 

The other reason is I am not a fan of weakening the claims that legitimately harmed consumers have from actual abusive and egregious violations by baiting them to break the law with vague letters just to file a suit to get go away money.  Our strength is in the high road not in sinking to their level.

 

I completely disagree about JDBs like Midland stepping up their game and being more saavy.  They are still a disorganized mess with the left hand not knowing what the right is doing.  While they may not call a debtor and curse them out or threaten to arrest them, they certianly will resport incorrect information to CRAs, send confusing letters and change the amount claimed to be owed mutiple times depending on who you talk to or which dunning letter you are reading.

 

It was only 8 months ago that they were hit with a FCRA suit by me for continuing to wrongly pull my credit reports after I got a "with prejudice" win against them the year before.  No one at MIdland bothered to remove my name from their automated system that pulls reports every 60 days.  I would call that an egregious violation, as I take my privacy matters very seriously - especially considering how nearly every company has now proven they are untrustworthy and neglegent with consumer's information by allowing their insecure systems to be open and susceptible to hacking.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

@Clydesmom ...this is exactly what happened, sorry.

Nobody that has been here for any small amount of time would come up with any of these views for Shellieh . I just figured it was her I-pad changing her words as usual, and am guessing it was unintentional.

I don't mind opposite opinions. Ideas spur off them.

Original creditors don't always try to collect either. I have 2 accounts that went into default in 2009. I even called them up and tried to settle them with an offer of 50%. At the time I defaulted on everything when I was sewer served on a medical debt (I did not owe, they failed to collect it from my insurance) I did a rush attempt to stop garnishment ( didn't know anything about vacating, nothing about law) and the BK was dismissed....I made 70.00 to much in the prior 6 months to qualify. (Dam that overtime shift). At any rate, you can't pick and choose your defaults in a BK 7. So when it was over I settled with many of my accounts. 3 of them would not settle. 2 of those have since sent me a 1099c. Go figure why they didn't take the 50% vs nothing. The last one out there is a care credit. They have it listed as dismissed, 0 balance. I owed them about 4k. But I believe I am one of the people they failed to disclose the introductory interest goes away if it is not paid in full monthly. I doubt they are going to open that can of worms. Got less than a year on the sol, so we will see.

My point..I tried to settle with those 3. Not one responded, not one did anything. I fully expected to be sued by someone. So if they are willing to take losses like that, no they shouldn't sell them. They didn't even try to get it back.

Chase on the other hand took the offer and sold it anyway.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

@shellieh98  apology accepted.

 

I was sewer served on a medical debt (I did not owe, they failed to collect it from my insurance) 

 

This for others who might read this.  You DO owe it.  While most providers will file with your insurance they are not required to.  Ultimately it is the patient's responsibility to see to it that a claim has been filed it is NOT a failure of the provider to collect it from the carrier.  ANYTIME you see a provider the first thing you should do is check on line and see to it that a claim is filed.  If it isn't you can file yourself.  LONG before they headed to court there is at least 90 days to 6 months of statements saying there is a bill owed to the provider.  If a claim isn't filed with the carrier DO IT.

 

3 of them would not settle. 2 of those have since sent me a 1099c. Go figure why they didn't take the 50% vs nothing.

My point..I tried to settle with those 3. Not one responded, not one did anything. I fully expected to be sued by someone. So if they are willing to take losses like that, no they shouldn't sell them. They didn't even try to get it back.
Chase on the other hand took the offer and sold it anyway.

 

You know that you cannot force a creditor to accept settlement terms anymore than they can force you to accept their settlement amount either.  Why some will and some won't is a mystery that no one can explain.  

 

There is no law requiring a creditor to settle with a consumer/debtor prior to suing or selling the debt.  Some states like SC require that a citizen be notified 30 days prior to suing so that a settlement can be reached i.e. a right to cure.  However, this is less to protect consumers and more to keep the courts from being clogged.  FL only requires that the consumer be informed they debt HAS been sold and by that point a JDB has it.

 

MY point is that it is consumers defaulting that drives the industry.  If you don't like the rules then lobby your legislature or the CFPB to enact a law requiring that consumers have the opportunity to purchase their debt for the same amount as a JDB prior to selling it if it bothers you that much but until that changes creditors aren't breaking any laws by selling the debt.  No matter how much you dislike the business model.

Link to post
Share on other sites

All right guys, as some of you might might not know, in 2013 I started on the trucking industry, and have since been an Over the Road driver of an 18 wheeler, so far I have a perfect driving record, and keeping it safe. Anyways my daughter was suppose to scan me the letter, never happened. Then I got a lucky load coming from Chicago to Miami, so I swing by the house ;-) Went to iHoop and got breakfast with the family, my wify also got me a hole bed and two night stands to assemble (kids broke the last one jumping on it). Also I took the time to scan the MCM crappy letter here it is:

 

opclc6.jpg

 

2u5qqld.jpg

 

Ok so even though is a dunning letter, they went creative with the 30 days disclosure. Not only that on the back it states its NOT an attempt to collect a debt, wait why on earth you'll put your contact info the amount and state they are not trying to collect, this is misleading information at the least. Ill DV them and get some other violations I'll send a PM to kitty cat and see if she wants to make some money. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not only that on the back it states its NOT an attempt to collect a debt, wait why on earth you'll put your contact info the amount and state they are not trying to collect, this is misleading information at the least. 

 

It isn't an attempt to collect the debt.  WHY put their contact info and amount?  It is because you live in FL which has a state law requiring that you be notified the debt was sold to another party.  That is all the letter did:  notify you they now own the debt and that you have 30 days to dispute.  I see no violation there at all.  They complied with the FDCPA and FL law.  They identified themselves as a debt collector, the OC, amount you are alleged to owe, and that you have 30 days to dispute.  They also stated collection efforts would cease for the required 30 days by FL law which also goes along with the FDCPA time to dispute with them.

@kutuzov what violation are you referring to?  

 

What was kitty cat or cat woman actual user name can't find her.

 

@LawKitty

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not going into details with you. No I did not owe it, think what you want. I know how it works.

2nd. I was giving you examples after you said they try multiple times to collect. Now you say there is no law requiring them to try to settle, blah blah blah, ya I know. Back to my original point. They should give you first dibs. Not required, I know. Blah blah, it is still in my opinion legal robbing the consumer. I would rather pay 3 times the cost fighting it than paying a JDB. But that's me. I would do everything I could to make their business not so profitable.

Again, my opinion, you have yours. They do nothing to help the economy except maybe create a few jobs as a blood sucker.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear MCM

I REFUSE to pay. Cease all contact with me. Signed me.

 

Dear MCM

I REFUSE to pay. Cease all contact with me. Signed me.

 

Per the FDCPA a "refusal to pay" means that they must automatically cease all contact.  Let them figure out what the law says.  I don't like to spell it out for them.  If they don't know, they can lean a $1,000 lesson from me.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not going into details with you. No I did not owe it, think what you want. I know how it works.

2nd. I was giving you examples after you said they try multiple times to collect. Now you say there is no law requiring them to try to settle, blah blah blah, ya I know. Back to my original point. They should give you first dibs. Not required, I know. Blah blah, it is still in my opinion legal robbing the consumer. I would rather pay 3 times the cost fighting it than paying a JDB. But that's me. I would do everything I could to make their business not so profitable.

Again, my opinion, you have yours. They do nothing to help the economy except maybe create a few jobs as a blood sucker.

 

@shellieh98

 

No one but you knows the specific facts about your cases, and no one but you knows what, if anything, you owe.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.