Caller ID and Collection Agencies

Can a collection agency hide their name and only reveal their phone number on a caller ID?

not only that,but some will not even put that out there.
some will read unknown 000-000-0000.some will just say
unknown name unknown number,private name private number.
a legitimate collector doesn't need to do these things.

I saw something on the FCC website that prohibits caller ID "spoofing" as a deceptive business practice. It generally addresses telemarketers but you may be able to apply it to CA's if they become harassing. Anyone ever tried that angle:

http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/callerid.html

I was receiving calls that just came up on the Caller ID as 0. I was not at home when the calls came in and no messages were left. I finally got smart and set my phone so that no hidden calls could come through. Now they still come through as O, but it does show the phone number.

No, NascarDevil, but I just might have to.

I've had the number "1068" show up in my CID for a couple of days now, and they leave no messages. So, I am willing to bet my left arm this is a CA hiding its identity.

I wanted them to leave a message, so I could tie the time of the message in with the time the number showed up in the CID, for the purposes of suing for fdcpa violations if I had to. (sounds all so "cloak and dagger" of me doesn't it) I'm guessing the CA (if that is who is calling) is smart enough to know not to leave a message for just that reason.

I'll probably answer it the next time they call just to find out who it is. I'm also willing to bet it is probably a CA I already DV'd. If that's the case, then I already have them on an FDPCA violation anyway; continued collection activity before the debt has be validated. I have only ever received two responses to well over 20 CA's that I have requested validation from in the past year.

But PaulMergal makes an excellent point! A legitimate, above-the-board, honest CA would not have to resort to such chicanery as hiding/spoofing their number in the CID.

I guess it could also be said it's a shame I have to resort to such tactics in order to catch a CA violating the FDCPA. But I currently have no money to pay them with, and I DV every CA as soon as I have the first contact with them anyway. So there should be no reason for them to attempt collecting on debts until they do validate them. And my own personal experience with the CA's I've had to deal with in the past year or more has been absolutely horrific, so I prefer not to deal with them on the phone at all!

What are your setups for documentation and how do you keep track and prove when a CA called and how many times? I am trying to collect evidence against a CA but I am not sure what all I should be doing. They only call me at work but sometimes they call other people they can link to me. I have no system in place at work to capture their name, phone number, time of call, number of calls and date electronically. I have been debating on buying a cheap tape recording system to record the calls then working the following information into the conversation:
Date, time, employee name, company name and the fact that I have requested in writing full validation.
I also keep a journal at work for all calls including work related so I make note of their calls in the journal.

Any ideas would be very helpful.

I don't know why they bother to hide their number, I never answer if I don't recognize the number. When it says "unavailable" I don't answer, unless they announce who they are on my answering matchine and I want to pick up.
I think they do that so you cannot block them with call block.

But I think there is an "anonymous call reject" option you can get through your phone company. Or at least it is available through mine, so I'm presuming others have it as well.

How it works is if a company that blocks their name/number in the CID calls you, the get this little prerecorded OGM that advises them you don't accept calls from companies that block their number. They are asked to then state their name and purpose of the call. Once they do that, your phone rings and the message plays to you with the recording of the information the caller gave and you are then presented with the choice to accept or reject the call.

The drawbacks are that it would not work on companies that "spoof" their number, as opposed to completely blocking. It also costs extra, which I can't really afford any additional "padded" charges on my phone bill, or any other bills for that matter. And I'm definitely not sure how this would work on the CA's using those wonderful auto-dialers.

Dollarsand Since...You might want to check with your HR department before recording calls at work. Have you DV'd the CA calling you at work and inform them that calls to your employer are prohibited? Does your work phone at least have a digital readout? I have taken pictures of my caller ID with my digital camera because every time I got a call it would give a total number of times that I received calls from that number but would only show a date/time stamp for the most recent. If that's not possible, then keeping a journal is a great idea. It might be helpful if it came to litigation. I use my Outlook to keep record of everything I do, when I rec'ved dunning letters, when I sent DV, CMRRR #'s and anything I dispute with the CRA's. That way I can sync with my computer at work, home and on my Blackberrry.

I work at a very small company with 4 employees. We do not have a HR department. I DV'd the 1st collection agency that called about this debt over a year ago. I am now being called by a new agency but I informed them that they had already been put on notice per my origional letter to not contact me via phone at any number and that they are to provide full validation. I have not sent this new company a new DV yet though but I will if they call again. They have only called 3 times in about 3 months. My work phone does not give any details about the caller unfortunately.

I am not sure if the first DV letter still stands since it is a new company. If it does then I have them on 3 violations so far. They called me 3 months ago and I told them about the DV letter. Then the called me on Monday and I reitterated the DV letter with C&D attached. Then they called my sister the following day which is a violation I believe. Obviously the calls aren't bad yet but I am trying to keep score in case they get really bad. I have received no written communication from this new agency yet. I want to record the calls to catch them on other violations. For example, they claimed that the item was on my current report and it was being charged 30% interest until I paid it off. I know it is on my report but it is charged off therefore it should be a set amount and not have interest applied and since I DV'd them it should not be reported until they provide the proper validation.

DOLLARSandSENSE, no, unfortunately the DV/C&D you sent the original CA does not apply to this new CA. Every time a debt is transfered to a new CA, you have to start the process all over again. I believe the first CA violated the law by transferring/selling this debt to the new CA without first validating it with you, but don't quote me on that. Someone will correct/clarify if I am wrong.

I would definitely recommend DV-ing the new CA STAT, also let them know you don't want them calling your employer, family, neighbors, or any other third parties. Even though you seem to be outside of the "30-day window" to dispute, it wouldn't hurt to try. Plus it sounds like you need to hit them with a C&D anyway!

I guess I'm flummoxed as to why they would even contact your sister the day after they spoke to you; from what you say you did talk to them so there is no reason they should have called her. The only possible reason they would have called her is to obtain/verify contact information for you, which they already had!

Man, that just grinds my gears when they do that! They know it is a violation of the fdcpa. I remember that one CA chick in the documentary "Maxed Out" saying she prefers to contact family members of debtors because it's embarrassing to the debtor. I have longed believe that all CA's do that as a matter of SOP, and that pretty much confirmed it for me!

But I digress.

Definitely take NascarDevils example and modify it for your own use; keep a log of all the collection calls you receive. Note dates, times, what CA called, name of collector you spoke with, what you talked about/specifics of all. All that good stuff.

Also, since you work for a small company, I'd be willing to bet your co-workers/boss already know all about your personal business and that CA's are hounding you at work. If that's the case, and you don't mind asking them to do so, see if you can get them to write statements regarding any calls you might be receiving at work. Anything they can add would help.

Of course, if they aren't aware of what's going on, and you don't want them to know your personal business, then this might not be a good idea. I'm really**** about people I work with not knowing my personal business, if I can help it, so I'm not sure how you feel about that.

****Adult term removed - Jason

DOLLARSandSENSE, no, unfortunately the DV/C&D you sent the original CA does not apply to this new CA. Every time a debt is transfered to a new CA, you have to start the process all over again. I believe the first CA violated the law by transferring/selling this debt to the new CA without first validating it with you, but don't quote me on that. Someone will correct/clarify if I am wrong.


I think if you're dealing with a CA working with a JDB it can be binding on the JDB and ANY CA they use if you DV both the CA and the JDB. If the JDB sells the debt to another JDB then you have to start all over again. I'm sure a lot of posters have dealt with Resurgent Capital and LVNV. LVNV owns Resurgent and several more CA's and if you DV Resurgent, LVNV just moves it around to another of their CA's and dunns you again. But, if you DV Resurgent and LVNV (I add any affiliate or subsidiary of LVNV to my DV's to them) and their Corporate Consul and they try to move it around to another of their CA's, that would be continued collection activity. There's a great example of this on Sui Juris(hopefully it makes it past the filter) dealing with this same "octopus" It's a little too much legal-ese for my taste but the reasoning is sound.

http://www.suijuris.net/forum/banks-...on-letter.html

I haven't received any written communication from this new company which is why I haven't DV'd them yet. If they call again or write me a letter I will DV them at that point.

I read a letter on here a long time ago about verbage that required full validation by any subsequent companies that collect on a debt where validation has already been requested but not provided. I doubt I could find that post now though.

I pretty much have the account on lock down I think. They don't have a solid case against me otherwise the last CA would have sued instead of transfering it since it is for a fairly large amount of $$$. They have no written contract and I never signed anything on this account ever. Basically they can't validate and they can't show anywhere that I agreed to any of their interest, fees or penalties.

My goal is to get a really bad collector and create a solid case against them. Then used that case as leverage to settle for a very small amount. Unfortunately my wife openend up this account in my name so I can't file a police report to make it go away.

I wonder how I can figure out if there is a JDB over top the CAs that have hit me so far. The two agencies are Richard J. Boudreau and Associates and also Nelson Watson and Associates. I will do some internet research this weekend to see if I can find a link.

Thanks NascarDevil, I wasn't taking that into consideration; if the JDB was just transfering the debt among any of its own CA's. I was speaking more along the line of a one CA selling it to a completely different CA.

Good information to know, though.

DOLLARSandSENCE, all I can say is document, document, document. Myself, I'm really **** about that (I think it's the accountant in me) and make sure I save just about everything concerning a particular CA/DVandC&D request. I would much rather have too much information, and not need it, than be missing that one piece of critical information that would put the "final nail in the coffin" of any fdcpa violation case I might file against a CA.

****Adult term removed - Jason

Once you have had enough of the CA harassing you, then all I can say is let them have it with both barrels. There is really no need for anyone (even if they do legitimately owe a debt) to have to be subjected to the abuse and disregard for the law that some CA's seem to have!

I wonder how I can figure out if there is a JDB over top the CAs that have hit me so far

Pull your reports and see how it is reporting. If the OC is still reporting, and updating the balance, it is likely still owned by the OC. If the balance is $0 with a sold/transferred to another lender, then it's in the hands of a JDB. The JDB may be reporting as well. If you haven't pulled your free annual reports:

www.annualcredittreport.com