Requiring Validation – A Consumer’s “Secret Weapon”

In my opinion, requiring that a debt collector validate or verify your debt when they first contact you is underused as a weapon. It’s easy and free for you to do (and isn’t hard for them to answer, either), but surprisingly often it can lead to the debt collector walking away and leaving you alone.

The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA)

The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) gives someone being harassed by debt collectors several useful tools. One of the best of these tools is requiring verification.

A “Secret”(?) Weapon

There’s nothing secret about requiring verification, but in my opinion consumers don’t use this one often enough. It costs nothing to use, takes very little time, and often, all by itself, is enough to convince them to leave you alone and look somewhere else for their victims.

The Right to Verification

Under the FDCPA, the first written communication from a debt collector must inform the consumer of his right to require verification of the debt (if the request is made within 30 days). Verification, or validation requires the collection company to go back to its source, the original creditor, and make sure that the consumer being contacted is the correct person and the debt is valid. Until the debt is validated, the collector may not take any further action on collecting the debt, and at least all the cases I’ve seen have included within that restriction any reporting of the debt to the credit reporting agencies. If the debt collector proceeds without verifying the debt first, you have a right to sue it.

The Requirement Is Absurdly Easy to Fulfill

The obligation is not very significant-a phone call will do, perhaps even as little as a checking of the computer tape or digital record. And yet even this minor obstacle will make the collection company go away surprisingly often. Perhaps the debt collectors view the early assertion of consumer rights as a warning of trouble to come.

Forming Good Habits Early On

And for the consumer, forming the habit of asserting legal rights seems to be an important step in bringing the whole debt situation under control. Out of this small acorn can grow a strong tree of financial security.

How to Require Validation

The way to require verification is very simple. When you receive a debt collection letter you simply write back to the debt collector and tell it you dispute the debt and request immediate verification. No special wording is required–nor is any special delivery (like registered mail), but I always suggest that you in fact send the request by registered mail, return receipt requested, so you will be able to prove that you wrote the letter, sent it, and that it was received by the debt collector. It is also a good idea to keep a copy of the actual letter that you send, too.

What If They’re Just Calling You?

But what happens if you’re just being telephoned by the debt collector? Under the FDCPA, a phone collector is required, within five days of the first contact, to send you, in writing, a notice of your right to dispute the debt and request verification. Failure to do so is a violation of the FDCPA that gives you the right to sue the company. And note that every communication from the debt collector should also have what we call the “mini-Miranda” disclosure, that “this communication is from a debt collector and any information you give may be used to collect a debt.”

Require Verification from EVERY Debt Collector

Every debt collector is different, and each one is required by law to provide you the right to dispute the debt and require verification. But by “debt collector” I mean the company that is harassing you, not the individual who happens to be calling you for that company.

Get in the habit of standing up for your rights, starting with the right to seek verification. Debt collectors are looking for the easiest way to make their profit, and standing up for your rights lets them know you won’t be easy.

What to Do Now

You will find information on many issues that come up in debt litigation and materials you can use to defend yourself here at our site. But for much more help, you should consider joining us.

 

Defending Yourself against a Debt Collector

Modern Debtor Prison – States Do Dirty Work for Debt Collectors

Sometimes there are traps for regular people set by predatory debt collectors. This is one of them.

Scam Alert

There is a disturbing trend in debt collection these days: getting the state to do the dirty work of intimidation and collection. In some jurisdictions, notably Illinois, debt collectors are actually managing to get people who supposedly owe them money thrown into jail. This is obviously a dirty trick and happens primarily because the debt collectors are managing to set cases for trial where attendance in mandatory; whereas in most civil cases failure to show up for trial results in a default judgment, in these cases the judge issues a warrant for arrest.

The subject of our Scam Alert today, however, is a little different. A scam involves trickery and deception, and that is what is happening in Missouri and elsewhere. In some places, Payday loan companies and other vulture companies are issuing short-term loans. What they do is require a post-dated check for the repayment.

Of course if you have a job – and keep it – and the post-dated check is made with that in mind, then when the money rolls in, you just pay off the debt. Of course you do it at heart-breaking interest rates, but at least theoretically that is what you bargained for, and there’s no real confusion about what the deal is costing. The problem comes in if something keeps you from getting that money you expected. In most loans, if you fail to make a payment you can be sued, and generally it is not a fun thing to be sued. If you have written a post-dated check, however, if you fail to make the payment (and cover the check), you are immediately subject to a civil penalty doubling the value of the check (in Missouri), and you may also be prosecuted to passing “bad checks.” Many lawmen are willingly allowing themselves to become the hitmen for these loan companies.

This is a “scam” because no one tells the people borrowing the money that failure to pay could result in an instant doubling of the loan or criminal prosecution, so payday loans, which charge such a high rate to account for the fact that people so often cannot make the payments, gets an extra level of security against default. And foists the risk of criminal enforcement onto people who don’t know what is happening.

It is also a perversion of the law. Bad check laws were created to protect people who trusted the people writing them checks – writing a check is, legally, a sort of guarantee that the check-writer has the money to pay for the check in the bank at the moment the check is written. Writing a check without the money in the bank is a type of fraud. But when a payday loan company accepts a post-dated check in exchange for a loan, they know the money is not there. There is no fraud when the check is written – and fraud requires that the intent to rip off the victim be present at the time the action which does rip them off (writing the check) is done. What’s happening here is that people who made a mistake about having money at a certain point in the future are being thrown into jail for that mistake. And the people on the other side of the transaction – the payday lenders – are perfectly aware that their customers have trouble with money – that’s who they target.

It is morally totally wrong for this to happen. But it is happening. So the lesson is, never pay for a loan – any loan under any circumstances – with a post-dated check. If the money isn’t in the bank, do not use a check.

 

Two Hidden Legal Risks of Debt Consolidation Loans

Debt consolidation is combining outstanding loans (debt) into a single package (consolidation). The debts therefore become one “new” loan, and instead of making several small payments on the loans you used to have, you make one larger payment on the new loan. Occasionally people ask whether debt consolidation is a good, economically constructive solution to credit card problems. Usually, the answer is that it is not. Certainly not as a solution all by itself. This article discusses some of the drawbacks of debt consolidation.

Debt Consolidation Loans

Debt consolidation is combining outstanding loans (debt) into a single package (consolidation). The debts therefore become one “new” loan, and instead of making several small payments on the loans you used to have, you make one larger payment on the new loan. Ideally and typically—and what has made debt consolidation loans popular as a home remedy for debt—the new loan is secured by some asset, often your home, and this allows you to obtain lower interest rates. Thus consolidation, in the  final analysis, is the conversion of debt that is not secured into debt that is secured by some real asset, in exchange for lower interest rates. It can reduce your monthly payments considerably, and of course that could be very helpful.

It also converts “old” loans into new loans, giving them a new statute of limitations (new life for loans that could be at or near their time of expiring). And it can even turn loans with short statutes of limitations into loans with long ones).

Why Doesn’t Debt Consolidation “Work?”

Economics

As a pure financial transaction, exchanging a lower interest rate for a security arrangement can be a very reasonable decision. Why then has it been such a disaster for so many people? Risk. Most people entering into complex financing are not able to assess risk and account for it, particularly when they are under economic pressure—which they usually are when they consider debt consolidation loans. Thus people systematically underestimate the risk that they won’t be able to make the payments on the new debt.

Additionally, since most people do not really want to go into debt in the first place, the existence of large credit card debt is indicative of other problems, either too little money or a tendency to overspend on unnecessary items. These issues are more likely to be made worse by the sudden reduction of economic pressure and the sudden, apparently greater amount of money or credit available to be spent.

The Hidden Risks of Debt Consolidation

In addition to these “systemic” issues, there are two other main hidden costs of consolidation that should be considered: loss of flexibility, and the nature of secured debt versus unsecured debt.

Consolidated Loans are Less Flexible

When you have ten loans for different things, from automobiles to credit cards, you have flexibility if hard times strike. If you simply cannot make your payments, you can give up some, but not all, of the things you have purchased. You can let some, but not all of the credit cards go into default. This is certainly not a happy thing, of course, but it raises the possibility of individualized debt negotiations, debt forgiveness, or even missed statutes of limitation. Again, these are not the choices and hopes of someone in flush economic conditions, but they are real options facing many people right now. In order for a debt collector to start garnishing your wages, it must find and sue you, must win, and then find your assets. It is an expensive and risky process for the debt collector if you fight. They sometimes drop the ball, and there are limits to how much of your wages can be garnished.

If everything else fails for you, you can declare bankruptcy, where homestead exemptions are likely to allow you to remain in your home.

The Nature of Secured Debt

The bigger risk of debt consolidation loans is the nature of secured, versus unsecured, debt. Remember that what powers the lower payments for consolidation is the existence of security—usually your home. Your home secures the debt, and that means that if you do not make your payments on the new debt, the lender can foreclose on your home and take it away. Foreclosures are generally “expedited” proceedings, meaning that your defenses are limited and the time for asserting them is restricted. In many states foreclosure is not even a judicial proceeding, although you have some legal rights you could assert in certain circumstances.

And what all that means is that instead of facing the prospect of years of battling over high-risk debts and questionable payoffs that could be trumped by bankruptcy, the banks can waltz into court and emerge in a very short time with your house. Put a little differently, your debt consolidation loan could make you homeless almost before you know it. And bankruptcy often, if not usually, will do nothing to protect you from it.

Anyone considering debt consolidation should think about these risks very carefully.

Cease Communication Letters under the FDCPA

Hey there! This content is available to MEMBERS only! Consider registering for an account.

The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act – the FDCPA

The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) is the centerpiece of legal protections for debtors against debt collectors. The law was passed in its essential form in 1977, and its goal was to protect debtors against the abuses of debt collectors. This article discusses what makes this law great, and some of its limitations.

The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act

The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA)  was enacted to put an end to some of the worst practices of the debt collection industry. It’s been a very good law, but the debt collectors are still doing many of the things the law was designed to present. You may be able to sue them or prevent them from suing you..

The Debt Collection Industry

Before the act, the debt collection industry was routinely engaging in the most abusive sorts of behavior imaginable, from calling debtors at all hours of the day or night and subjecting them to streams of cursing and name-calling, to discussing their debt with children, neighbors, and employers. Debt collectors frequently misrepresented themselves as attorneys and often threatened legal action which they were powerless to initiate. And they often attempted to, and did, collect debts that either never existed or were long unenforceable because of statutes of limitation or bankruptcy.

Whatever the staid spokespeople of the debt collection industry may say, this is the background of their industry. The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. Section 1692, et seq., was enacted to put a stop to these extreme behaviors in 1977. Because the people intended to be protected by the act are underrepresented by lawyers, and because of the explosion of debt litigation over the past decade, many of the old abuses still continue, and as people increasingly defend themselves from the debt collectors, they develop new tricks all the time.

The FDCPA: A Pretty Good Law

Nevertheless, the FDCPA is in many ways a model piece of legislation. What makes the law so powerful is that, in addition to making certain enumerated acts illegal, the Act also more generally makes acts that are “oppressive,” “false or misleading representations,” or “unfair practices” illegal. This means that, whereas in most laws, the would-be wrongdoer is free to craft his actions around the specific language of the law and find “loopholes,” under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, at least, the consumer may argue that these actions are still unfair or oppressive. The Supreme Court has ruled that an “unfair” act can be shown by demonstrating that it is “at least within the penumbra” of some common law, statutory “or other established concept” of unfairness.

That’s pretty broad. The price for this flexibility, however, is that the remedies—what you get if you prove the case—are less powerful. And this may be why the practices are still occurring today.

As mentioned above, there are specific actions enumerated in the FDCPA, and these include most notably, suing on expired debts, filing suit in distant jurisdictions, publishing certain types of information regarding the debtor, calling outside of specified hours. And the list goes on. If the debt collector is acting in some highly offensive way, chances are he’s within the specific provisions of the Act. These can be found at 15 U.S.C. 1692c, d, e and f. You can find the specifics by Googling the Act or provision and determining whether the specific action you’re concerned about is within one of these provisions.

 

Social Security

Can they Garnish Your Social Security?

Overcoming Default Judgments in Debt Cases

This is a companion to the video, “Procedure for Moving to Vacate Default Judgments.” This video explains why you should try to vacate (remove) a default judgment against you and generally how to go about doing it. The second video goes into a little more detail on that and tells you specifically what documents you will  need to file and what they should contain. If you have defaulted on a debt suit and want to try to reopen it (to prevent collection), check out our product: Motion to Vacate Pack. For a more comprehensive understanding of the debt law and defense, you need our Debt Defense System.

We categorize this video under “collection” because often the way people discover there’s been a default judgment is that there is some action to garnish wages or collect on the judgment. If that’s your situation, it isn’t too late. To prevent the collection/garnishment, you will need to get the judgment against you vacated (eliminated). And the very first step in doing that is finding out what happened. To do that, you will go to the court, look up the judgment, get the file on it, and look in the file to see what happened.

It gets a little more complicated than that after you find out what happened, but there are actions you can take, and our job is to help you figure out which and to do them.

 

What to Do If You’ve Got Debt Troubles

If your bills are adding up and the bill collectors are beginning to bug you, you need to start taking action to protect yourself.

This video goes through the reasons you should win if you get sued for debt and begins the discussion on how to send the right signals to the debt collectors to leave you alone.

 

What if I Think I Owe the Money?

What if I Really Owe the Money – or Think I Do?

What if you think you really owe the money? Should you defend yourself? Here’s why you must defend yourself. If you don’t you run the risk of having to pay twice. And if you do defend yourself, you probably won’t have to pay. If that bothers you, give the money to somebody who really needs it.

Most People Being Sued Actually DO Owe Someone Some Money

If you’re being sued by a debt collector, you probably think you owe them the money, although it’s surprising how often people who do NOT owe anybody any money get sued. If that’s you – you still need to fight the case, it won’t go away by itself. But if you actually do owe somebody the money for which you are being sued, you still need to be careful.

And you should still defend yourself as well as you can.

You must make the debt collector prove every part of its case – not only that you owe the money, but that you owe it to them. And exactly how much you supposedly owe. That’s because old debts get sold – often more than once – and if you don’t make the debt collector prove it owns the debt, you may pay the wrong person. And then you might have to pay again if you get sued by the person that actually owns the debt.

In addition, most people who get sued for debts do not owe what the debt collectors are trying to collect. They routinely add fees and interest they should not, and consumer protections agencies and organizations routinely estimate that almost all debt collection suits include extra charges – and many of them are for far more than is owed.

“Double-Banging”

Because of the extremely lax regulation of debt collectors, and the frequent erosion of those regulations that do exist, debt collectors develop many dirty tricks. One of the dirtiest is known as “double-banging.” This is the repeated collection of the same debt by the same debt collector.  You may wonder how such a thing is possible, and it would be difficult, no doubt, if these double-bangers didn’t have a couple of things going for them.

One thing that makes double-banging easier is “spoofing.” That’s a technology that allows debt collectors to cause your phone to think the phone call is coming from another number, usually a local exchange. Thus, while your phone tells you the call is from your own telephone area code, it’s actually originating far away. And of course the debt collectors often change their names – not just the people calling, but the companies they’re supposedly representing. So you are receiving a call from a company that already collected from you, and now it is collecting the same debt again under another name. And they don’t necessarily wait till you have paid the debt off the first time, either. In one known case, a debt collector collected the same debt TEN times.

And that was without even suing the victim. They can do that, too.

Ultimately, what makes all this possible is that people let it happen. That is, they get scared, or feel guilty, or get angry… any number of feelings cause you to relax your guard, and then they get you. Instead of requiring them to provide proof, you’re asking how to pay.

And once they get you, you go on a “sucker list.” That’s just what you probably think it is – a list of people who will fall for various scams. Debt collectors sometimes trade these sucker lists to each other, so after one of them has collected as much as possible, they trade your name to another who will do the same thing.

The Good News

The good news about debt collectors is that they usually CANNOT prove their cases if you make put them to the test. The whole process by which they get these debts is so sloppy and careless that they usually cannot find or obtain the proof that they need to win their case. IF you defend yourself.

Protect Your Rights

Our mission is to protect people from the debt collection process. If you are being sued by debt collectors, or if you are being harassed for money, you need to take action to defend what’s yours. For much more information on defending yourself, go to Fast Track to Debt Defense.