Arbitration and third party collectors

[THELEGEND]

Hi guys, im new here. Ill give a little background to my problem. I have 3 cards with Synchrony that i had to let go because of a disability. After 7 months had past the debt started to be passed around. Each time i sent a DV and elected the arbitration clause in the contract. Each time it was passed to someone else. This time Synchrony apparently sold the debt to P@B CAPITAL . My question is do i still enforce the arbitration agreement? I have been reading and some say yes and some say no? Any help is appreciated!!

[Brotherskeeper]

1 hour ago, THELEGEND said:

This time Synchrony apparently sold the debt to P@B CAPITAL . My question is do i still enforce the arbitration agreement? I have been reading and some say yes and some say no?

Here is a clause from a Synchrony Amazon.com Store Card Account Agreement. You would need to look up the correct branded agreement for your account.

https://www.consumerfinance.gov/credit-cards/agreements/issuer/synchrony-bank/

"IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT THIS AGREEMENT
Assignment. We may sell, assign or transfer any or all of our rights or duties under this Agreement or your account, including our rights to payments. We do not have to give you prior notice of such action. You may not sell, assign or transfer any of your rights or duties under this Agreement or your account."

[THELEGEND]

So looks like i can still use it..

[BackFromTheDebt]

2 hours ago, THELEGEND said:

Hi guys, im new here. Ill give a little background to my problem. I have 3 cards with Synchrony that i had to let go because of a disability. After 7 months had past the debt started to be passed around. Each time i sent a DV and elected the arbitration clause in the contract. Each time it was passed to someone else. This time Synchrony apparently sold the debt to P@B CAPITAL . My question is do i still enforce the arbitration agreement? I have been reading and some say yes and some say no? Any help is appreciated!!

Yes. 

100% absolutely yes, no matter how they may whine and scream and claim otherwise. If they sell the account, they sell the contractual obligations that go along with the account, Meaning, arbitration applies to whomever owns the account.  

You need to understand:  Synchronicity has about the best arbitration agreement you could possibly ask for.  Absolute poison for JDBs.  When they buy the account, they are stuck with it.  Boo hoo hoo.  That is why they get the account for pennies on the dollar.  They know there are a certain number of consumers who know about the arbitration agreement, and they usually can't collect on them.  

It appears you have been playing a nice game of whack-a-mole so far.  Join the club. 

For each of your separate debts, one of two things will happen:

1. The game of whack-a-mole will go on for a while until they finally give up or the debt goes SOL.  In that case, you have won.

2.  Someone will finally send it off to a lawyer, and they will threaten to sue you.  If and when that happens, make sure you come back here for further advice.  You may need to file in arbitration, and, if already sued, you may need to file an MTC.  Those are generally a winning strategy.

 

I've been through the whack-a-mole stage myself, and I've had both results with OCs.  With JDB, only the first.  Others here have had to go to stage 2 with JDBs, and have usually won.  

[THELEGEND]

Thanks..ill keep   

 you informed.Ill wait to send off dv letter until just about to the 30 days are up..Then we will see what happens

[BackFromTheDebt]

29 minutes ago, THELEGEND said:

Thanks..ill keep   

 you informed.Ill wait to send off dv letter until just about to the 30 days are up..Then we will see what happens

Pretty good, but send a little earlier than that.  Sometimes stuff happens, and you don't want to miss a deadline.  If you send it out a week or so early, then you have less to worry about.  

Waiting until the 30 days is almost up is overrated, unless you are getting close to SOL.  It can buy you a little extra time, but for what?  I found in my games of whack-a-mole that once they decide to pass on it, it takes at least a few more months before someone else picks it up.  The older the debt gets, the longer it takes.  

[WhoCares1000]

OK, 2 things here that need to be discussed.

Once debts are sold off, they go into the JDB system. What usually happens is that the debt is initially sold for about 5 - 10 cents on the dollar and the JDB that purchases it tries to collect. If they are not successful (and sometimes if they are), they put the debt into another portfolio that they sell off for less than they paid for it. Generally, most JDB's will keep a debt for 3 - 6 months before selling it on to the next sucker in line. Eventually, the debt makes it to a JDB who is willing to sue but you might be scaring the current ones off with the demand for arbitration (rather than fight, they just sell).

When a debt is sold to a JDB, they JDB gets all the rights to the contract and all the responsibilities of the contract. No matter how much they scream, cry, or froth at the mouth, they are required to follow the contract so if the current contract at the time the account went into default included an arb clause, they JDB is required to honor the arb clause.

[Goody_Ouchless]

This depends on who you are dealing with. Major players (Midland, Cavalry, etc.) do not resell debts. As @Clydesmom pointed out in a recent thread, sometimes what looks like a long chain-of-custody is really just a debt passing around branches of a single owner, for accounting purposes. What initially looks like a "Golden Ticket" (a debt with too many owners and too few affidavits) is actually a debt buyer going "above and beyond" to provide detailed account history.

[BackFromTheDebt]

Sometimes the chain ends with a JDB who will sue, sometimes not. 

There are a certain number who don't want to mess with someone who is intent on arbitration.  

There are some that don't want to mess with anyone who won't just pay off.  

And there are some that will sue, even if you mention arbitration.  If if gets to one of them before the SOL, they will probably sue.  If not, there will probably be no suit.

 

I've only had one debt ever get to a JDB, and they never sued.  My state has stricter requirements about the chain of custody that other states, such as consumers are required to be notified with every sale, but rarely are.  When they saw I knew my rights, and was eager to take it to arbitration, they backed off.  It was under $1000 so why bother?

[Guest usctrojanalum]

You should be able to still use it.  In recent cases in District Courts around the Country consumers have been finding this out the hard way, as their FDCPA claims against collection attorneys and collection agencies have been stayed pending resolution in arbitration which was in the underlying agreement with the original creditor. 

[fisthardcheese]

Whoever told you that arbitration no longer applies is wrong in all caps.

[THELEGEND]

thanks guys back to drawing board

[Brotherskeeper]

13 hours ago, THELEGEND said:

thanks guys back to drawing board

@THELEGEND For your reading pleasure:

https://www.balch.com/-/media/pdfs/publications/compelling-and-staying-arbitration-in-alabama.pdf

"INTERSECTION OF THE FAA AND ALABAMA LAW

Although the FAA preempts state law to the extent that state law contradicts federal law, Alabama state courts apply state contract law to determine whether the parties have entered into an arbitration agreement (see Capitol Chevrolet & Imports, Inc. v. Payne, 876 So. 2d 1106, 1109 (Ala. 2003)). Given the AAA’s narrow scope, and because the FAA applies to nearly all Alabama arbitrations, Alabama courts consider the FAA part of the Alabama arbitration law (see Robertson, 134 So. 3d at 868). If an agreement falls under the FAA, Alabama state courts apply the federal standard for arbitrability when determining whether to compel or stay arbitration, rather than evaluating these threshold questions under Alabama state law (see Southland v. Keating Corp., 465 U.S. 1, 12-13 (1984); see also Practice Note, Compelling and Enjoining Arbitration in US Federal Courts: Arbitrability (6-574-8707)). Because the AAA only applies in the rare circumstance of a purely intrastate transaction with no effect on interstate commerce (see Alabama State Law), almost all arbitration agreements in Alabama fall under the FAA (see Birmingham News v. Horn, 901 So. 2d 27, 44 (Ala. 2004) (overruled on other grounds by Horton Homes, Inc. v. Shaner, 999 So. 2d 462 (Ala. 2008))). Whether or not the FAA applies, Alabama courts apply Alabama procedural rules to the enforcement proceedings (see Unum Life Ins. Co. of Am. v. Wright, 897 So. 2d 1059, 1074 (Ala. 2004))."

[THELEGEND]

On 4/9/2018 at 10:38 AM, Brotherskeeper said:

@THELEGEND For your reading pleasure:

https://www.balch.com/-/media/pdfs/publications/compelling-and-staying-arbitration-in-alabama.pdf

"INTERSECTION OF THE FAA AND ALABAMA LAW

Although the FAA preempts state law to the extent that state law contradicts federal law, Alabama state courts apply state contract law to determine whether the parties have entered into an arbitration agreement (see Capitol Chevrolet & Imports, Inc. v. Payne, 876 So. 2d 1106, 1109 (Ala. 2003)). Given the AAA’s narrow scope, and because the FAA applies to nearly all Alabama arbitrations, Alabama courts consider the FAA part of the Alabama arbitration law (see Robertson, 134 So. 3d at 868). If an agreement falls under the FAA, Alabama state courts apply the federal standard for arbitrability when determining whether to compel or stay arbitration, rather than evaluating these threshold questions under Alabama state law (see Southland v. Keating Corp., 465 U.S. 1, 12-13 (1984); see also Practice Note, Compelling and Enjoining Arbitration in US Federal Courts: Arbitrability (6-574-8707)). Because the AAA only applies in the rare circumstance of a purely intrastate transaction with no effect on interstate commerce (see Alabama State Law), almost all arbitration agreements in Alabama fall under the FAA (see Birmingham News v. Horn, 901 So. 2d 27, 44 (Ala. 2004) (overruled on other grounds by Horton Homes, Inc. v. Shaner, 999 So. 2d 462 (Ala. 2008))). Whether or not the FAA applies, Alabama courts apply Alabama procedural rules to the enforcement proceedings (see Unum Life Ins. Co. of Am. v. Wright, 897 So. 2d 1059, 1074 (Ala. 2004))."

Thanks..Alabama is good for something i guess

 

[THELEGEND]

Just got a notice today synchrony pulled from law firm and sold it to

Crown asset..P&B capitol group has it. Anything you can tell me about this junk buyer?

[fisthardcheese]

I thought P:&B was the firm that had it in your first post of the thread?

[THELEGEND]

no its was law firm rausch sturn,etc They had 3 then all 3 were pulled and sold

[BackFromTheDebt]

Back to whack-a-mole

[THELEGEND]

wash,rinse,repeat..anyone know anything on P&B CAPITOL

[Brotherskeeper]

@THELEGEND

Class action suit filed on 1/31/18 in US Western District of New York:

https://www.classaction.org/news/p-and-b-capital-group-crown-asset-management-named-in-debt-collection-complaint#embedded-document