Gee, you're pleasant. Someone's stereotyping with no justification. That lightbulb in your avatar is lying, because if it's the one in your head, it's sure not on. For the record... my credit is immaculate.

[Law Student]

Cajun, that message should be shot down in court in my opinion. The CA can have no reasonable degree of certainty that they aren't communicating with a third party. Someone might have answered the phone and "pushed 1" for "yes I am John Doe" out of curiousity. Lately, I've heard of some fully automated calls which are similar. If someone pushed 1, for "affirmative", they would have all the consumer's information.

Guest, if you are not a bottom feeder, than you should have not taken offense, hence your reversal should have been non existant. Care to explain?

[Anthony Lemons]

Sorry, I was not logged in. Anyway, as I was saying, if you are a reputable collector, than why feel offended about the bottom feeder remark?

[Anthony Lemons]

Any person who is secure in themselves needs not victimize others for their own twisted fetishes, such as collecting.

[countrygirl]

Got another call from them (ASG) this morning at 8:05. I answered and no one was there, or should I say they didn't say anything, I hung up and picked up the phone a few seconds later and they were still on the line. I then pushed a few of the phone buttons and said 'operator this is one of them' :wink: and I hung up.....had no calls all day from them. HA!

Hey Lemonade, it's just a job.

[cajunbulldog]

Law Student,there is a class action case going on in California right now and a few fellow advocates I know are researching because they also want to test this message in court.The class action is based on guess what!Third party disclosure.

Hey Lemon tree, I'm sorry you feel that way. I don't think myself less of a person for what I do. I don't get my jollies by calling people and telling them to *gasp* pay the money they owe to my client. Sure, the balance is full is due on the account, but there are always options. The fact is, a lot of debtors have this stigma about talking to collectors because they think we try to demean them and make them feel horrible about owing money. We don't need to; they already should feel bad about it. They took money from a creditor and didn't give it back. It's like going into a store, taking a candy bar, eating it, and when caught, telling the security guard, "Oh, I don't have the money." Exactly the same. How would you feel if you loaned someone money and then when you tried to ask them to pay it back, they ignored you, or hung up on you, or yelled and swore at you? My guess is you wouldn't like it. In my case, my client tried for at least six months before it comes to my office to ask them for repayment. They didn't do so. They asked nicely. They used customer service. The debtor still didn't give the client the money it rightfully should be getting back. Customer service at that point ENDS. The client was nice for SIX MONTHS. I don't have to be. Although I still am, and still get abused. I get verbally abused far more than I give it. All I'm doing is calling you on the phone. I'm not coming to your house and sitting on your porch waiting for you to come home. I'm not literally coming up to you and telling you that you are scum for owing my client money. I'm asking for the money you owe my client. I'm not destroying your life. If you don't agree with being charged late fees and over-the-limit fees and interest, you never should have agreed to use the credit card. It's all there in the cardholder agreement. Debtors get so upset when that is brought up. "I never agreed to all those charges!" Yes, you did. Don't deny you did; it's not true. You never thought you'd be charged them, I know. But you were, and they are perfectly legal and appropriate.

I'm sorry some of you think collectors are evil, malicious beings, and it's true, some of us are. Not all of us. Not even most of us. In fact, I would say over ninety percent are pleasant people with customer service skills. It's just a job. It's not a baptism into evil. Maybe when you understand that, Lemon drop, you'll be less of an angry person.

[Anthony Lemons]

Guest, I appreciate your play on my name, and displays the truth of your level of intellect. Anyway, I asked you why you would take offense to the 'bottom feeder' remark, if your hands are clean.

[Anthony Lemons]

At least I display who I am with no 'guest' disguise. Please expose your true identity, so that we may all relish in the perfect human being.

I'm doubleclique. I'm having difficulty staying logged in, so I'm not bothering. Same person been posting in the thread the whole time.

Oh, and playing on your name is just trying to make you chuckle a little, since you seem to be such an unpleasant person and all. No offense meant, of course.

The fact that I am able to conduct a coherent, logical conversation should be enough to prove my level of intellect. So because I made fun of you a little, that drops my level of intellect in your eyes? Quite frankly, your short-sightedness and inability to see the other side of the issue is far worse.

I never said I took offense to your comment about my job. I just mentioned that you were stereotyping without justification. You never hear about the decent collectors, just the bad ones.

[Law Student]

Cajun, I'll have to look up that class action. I find it interesting. Some say that the recen California disclosure law (when recording a call) might have effects across the country as well, but I believe that will take quite some time.

[Leah]

I am sorry guest...your posts would have been much more intelligent if you had left the name calling out of it...there really was no need to make plays on peoples names.

So saying I have a twisted fetish and calling me a bottom-feeder is more intelligent?

[Leah]

Nope I never said that either...I am just saying that if you wanted to prove how intelligent you are, you would have skipped the name callin all together...It takes a bigger man....