Internet's first get-out-of-debt community - 128,000 members

I submitted a DV letter and in the letter stated:

Posted: Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:38 pm Subject:

72 hours should be sufficient time for them to update their files. Did you send it to a collection agency or to the original creditor? Original creditors are not bound by a cease phone calls letter under the federal law. Your state law may be different.

If you sent the letter to a collection agency, document all calls received and contact a lawyer to pursue any claims you may have for violations of the FDCPA.

Posted: Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:39 pm Subject:

never request, tell them no further contact. you run the show not them.

Wink

*chuckle*

Posted: Mon Feb 05, 2007 9:30 pm Subject:

Letter was sent to a CA.

Posted: Mon Feb 05, 2007 9:40 pm Subject:

The CA is bound by the letter. Save the messages and seek counsel. The CA is in violation of the FDCPA.

Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2007 6:20 am Subject:

Texaslawyer, are you sure? My understanding of the FDCPA was that a CA was not bound under its provisions to comply with *all* "no phone call" demands, only certain ones, such as place of employment, relatives, and the like; that is, if you tell a CA not to call you at home anymore, the FDCPA does not require them to obey. No?

Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2007 7:03 am Subject:

texaslawyer is correct most people use inconvient to call me clause to limit calls but still be able to use phone in certain situations. A c&d to an abusive collector that cuts off phone contact is legal and actionable under federal law if they violate terms of letter.

Debt Padawan,they are only allowed third party calls for skip tracing purposes.Once they know where you are,there is no reason to call anyone else.

Lastly,if they are orginal creditor seek legal assistance as fdcpa would not apply.

Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2007 7:13 am Subject:

I know about the "skip tracing" stuff, not calling at work, and so on, but it never occurred to me that a consumer could use the "inconvenient to call" clause to specify that it is never convenient to call. Thanks for the tip.

Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2007 7:19 am Subject:

Debt Padawan Texaslawyer may have caselaw to prove this but I am going off a general sense of fdcpa guidelines.I would never recommend a full c&d on a verified debt that is still within statute of limitations.That would be asking for a lawsuit.

Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2007 7:32 am Subject:

I can understand your viewpoint, Cajunbulldog, but even so, it's quite rare for a collection agency to take, or threaten to take, legal action after receiving a C&D. I've done it at least a dozen times over the past 18 months or so, and only one CA has even mentioned it. Furthermore, if a CA does threaten to take legal action, there are still other approaches that you can use, such as asking for debt validation. That's what I did with the one CA that mentioned legal action after I cease-comm'ed them. That was 14 months ago, and I'm still waiting for validation. Or any other communication or action, for that matter. And this was with NCO, who is, as we all know, one of the sleaziest agencies around.

The risk of lawsuit is, admittedly, real, but from my own experience and from everything else I've heard, it's also remote. The only time I've ever seen anyone sued is when they didn't first exercise their rights under the FDCPA, although I'll also freely acknowledge that there are probably a few exceptions that I've just never heard about.

Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2007 9:11 am Subject:

Debt Padawan,You make a good point that most will not sue just have to be careful for the ones that love to sue.They are out there. One of the main things that I have seen is if you owe a large amount or have good seizable assets,then be careful and walk slowly around them.

Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2007 6:21 pm Subject:

Cajunbulldog is right is not recommending a full c & d on a verified debt within the SOL. If you do this, the only option they have to try to collect is to file suit. A full c & d lets the CA know they have to give up or take legal action. Therefore, it is best used when the debt is not yours, or it is beyond the SOL.

It is important to note that the option of full c & d does exist under the FDCPA. Then the CA can only contact you in certain situations, like letting you know they are in fact filing suit, or letting you know they will not be contacting you anymore. Unfortunately I have seen CA's call someone after getting the c&d to tell them "we won't be calling anymore. Can you make a payment today?" which is another violation of the FDCPA.

Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2007 6:50 pm Subject:

Well, I don't know... I can only repeat what I've already said, which is that I've cease-comm'ed at least a dozen CAs over the past 18 months or so. All of my debt is still within SOL, but even so, only one responded with a threat of legal action, and when I subsequently told them to validate, I never heard from them again. *shrug* Maybe I'm just lucky, or maybe none of my debts are large enough for anyone to want to bother suing over. I do know that Bud Hibbs recommends always cease-comming a CA and never working with one under any circumstances, and virtually everyone who follows his advice reports that it works well for them.

Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2007 6:54 pm Subject:

Texaslawyer,

I wonder if community requests it if we could set up a perm sticky with full factual laws on fdcpa and fcra? I think this would be a great idea for this board.