and regarding debt validation.

a statement that unless the consumer, within thirty days after receipt of the notice, disputes the validity of the debt, or any portion thereof, the debt will be assumed to be valid by the debt collector;

ERMI sends notices to mailing address immediately once the account reaches our office. so there you go. validation.

[skydivr7673]

caps lock, you really need to get a grip on reality.

I dont care what you claim the intent was. And the court doesnt either. When that many calls are being made that A REASONABLE PERSON WOULD CONSIDER IT ANNOYING OR HARASSING, then your so-called intent just went down the crapper. Dont believe me? Fine--call my house five times in a half hour, every day, for the next week....and let me show you by suing you. And when the judge sees the point, perhaps you finally will. You see, your "intent" is really not at issue in this matter--it is obvious you are trying to collect money. What is at issue is what is reasonable. And your company, quite frankly, is not reasonable.

Oh, validation?? You clearly dont even know what the word means. Your company sends a notice--well, I never got anything at the beginning, but thats ok, you keep lying to yourself about what ERMI does every time--but that notice IS NOT VALIDATION. Your company sends a notice that lists an account number, a balance, and maybe the original creditor....who the hell lied to you and told you that this constitutes calidation under the law?? IT DOESNT. Not by a long shot. Just so you can finally get educated, since your employer doesnt know how to do that themselves, validation under the law does the following:

1--provides proof that the consumer did in fact open the account with original creditor--that it is truly his/her debt.

2--provides proof that the CA is authorized by law to collect on the debt.

3--provides proof of the amount you claim the consumer owes.

If your "statement" does not do those things, then SURPRISE!! It isnt validation. Validation is not just some letter that ERMI types up, either--documentation must come from the original creditor, and not be internally sourced like what youre talking about.

Are you sure you even work in the collection business?? Because you sure dont know squat about the law that governs it!

of course it's not just us that sends the letters. GE money ( financer of ERMI debts ) also sends them out. any more complaints..?

yeah the intent is really to collect the money. what do you think were trying to do?
call you up and ask how are you doing?

im so excited when i wake up in the morning wondering what excuses youre going to come up with. haha.

[skydivr7673]

of course it's not just us that sends the letters. GE money ( financer of ERMI debts ) also sends them out. any more complaints..?

yeah the intent is really to collect the money. what do you think were trying to do?
call you up and ask how are you doing?

im so excited when i wake up in the morning wondering what excuses youre going to come up with. haha.

Not one single word of what you just wrote addresses what I said. This is a good indication that you are out of excuses.

Who cares if someone else sends letters?? YOU ARE ALL REQUIRED TO FOLLOW THE LETTER OF THE LAW. It is that simple. And you dont. So, the financier sends letters too--does that mean that you can break the law because they do? GET REAL.

Like I said, your intent is not the issue. Everyone knows the intent is to get money. That does not, however, give you the right to act in ANY manner which a reasonable person would find excessive, aaanoying, or harassing. COURTS ALL OVER THIS COUNTRY HAVE RULED IN THIS MANNER...so why are you holding onto such ignorance still??

tell you what, enough BS. call my house. Call it a dozen times a day, and then try to hide behind your "intent" crap. And let me educate you first-hand about what the law means, mmkay pumpkin?

have a nice day

[cajunbulldog]

As caps lock realized,I don't answer his questions anymore.I no longer have the time or desire to try to explain the clear meaning of a law when said person has no desire to learn it or even respond in a meaningful manner. This is a open forum and everyone including you are still welcome providing rules are followed. I will let the other members hash it out from now on as I am very busy helping people with their problems.

sky diver you're not seeing the big picture. it's not harrassment.repeat that 100 times and maybe you'll get the idea.

[skydivr7673]

caps lock, YOURE not seeing the big picture--YOU DONT GET TO MAKE THAT DETERMINATION.

The courts use the standard of "would a reasonable person feel harassed?".....since you work for a slimeball operation that is allergic to honesty, you are hardly a reasonable person.

Tell me, if you think you know so much, why are courts all across this country finding in favor of consumers that sue these moronic companies?? In the end, you still have no clue. You have been plainly wrong about what the fdcpa requires, I dont think you have gotten even one thing right thus far. You have changed your tune each time you get caught in a lie. Your story has changed from start to finish. THE TRUTH DOES NOT CHANGE FROM TODAY TO TOMORROW....and yet between you and me, only one of us has not changed his tune. And it isnt you.

Go get a clue, caps lock. Seriously. Even if you have to steal one. I actually pity you for not having the simple common sense to look at the law itself and see what you've been taught is dead wrong. But I promise you this--if the day ever comes when I have to pick up the phone and it's ERMI on the other end, I pray with everything I have that youre the guy calling. Then we're gonna see just how much you can learn from getting your a$$ sued.

This "debate" is done, chief. I am not going to continue debating with someone who hasnt been right yet and is too afraid to use the words "I WAS WRONG". Grow up, go grow a pair, do whatever ya gotta do man, but give this sad dishonest bit a rest already. I showed you the law. I showed you word for word what it says. And each time you saw it, you changed your claims. Either wake the heck up or go crawl back to your dialer and roll the dice. But I do promise you this---thanks to the sleazy way your prized company has handled me personally, I make it my mission on this forum right here and now to inform each and every person that ever asks about ERMI exactly how pathetic you people really are. Oh, and I've got another surprise for you too, ERMI man....and when I can post it, you wont have anything left to hide behind.

Have a nice day.

the way i see it you're looking at the law the wrong way man.

for every one of your complaints i have a rebuttal.
andyou repeat yourself over and over again.

[skydivr7673]

a rebuttal?? No, you didnt. What you did was completely ignore two facts...

1--that your BS scenarios do not in any way apply to the situations that people are posting here--their personal experience with your company has NOTHING to do with your made-up scenarios. And you would much rather cry and whine about a debtor that knows its his debt than address what we are posting to you....when you dont even have the right name, or address, it is obviously a skip trace problem. But you keep reverting back to the same ridiculous "scenario #1" crap. How many times do you need to hear that the debt your company claimed I owed was from a state I have never even been to, much less lived in, before your BS scenarios will stop?

you cannot address the problem by addressing a completely different "scenario" instead, Einstein. Get that much right at least.

2--as for your "just tell them its a wrong number" bit, you failed there too, because all you did was keep repeating the same thing. Of course, when multiple people in here were posting that they did this and ERMI keeps calling anyways, you had nothing to say about it, did you?? Nope, just the same "how hard is it to tell them its the wrong number??" crap....

And now you wanna tell me that I am looking at the law the "wrong way"? Tell you what--you clearly have no clue about what this law actually says or means. And you also clearly have no intention to listen to my knowledge of this law. So, how about we see precisely what the courts are saying about this law? After all, arent the courts the actual authority on the matter?? Lets take a look here....using the PACER website, I found no less than 88 separate lawsuits filed against Encore in just the last few years, not a single one of which was dismissed in favor of Encore. NOT ONCE. The complaints range all over the place, from improper third party contacts, to contacting a consumer that was known to have secured counsel, to threats, to excessive calling....all kinds of crap. By the way, these are only the cases filed in federal courts, not the ones filed in state courts. And the closest thing in ANY of these cases to Encore being in the right is a "Dismissal WITH PREJUDICE" against them. This is what occurs when Encore settles with the plaintiff for a set amount of money.

Dont believe me?? here--I DL'ed the page that lists them all....

read on....

[skydivr7673]

[img]/forums/attachments//bsm1_172.jpg[/img][img]/forums/attachments//bsm2_396.jpg[/img][img]/forums/attachments//bsm3_166.jpg[/img][img]/forums/attachments//bsm4_109.jpg[/img][img]/forums/attachments//bsm5_648.jpg[/img][img]/forums/attachments//bsm6_106.jpg[/img][img]/forums/attachments//bsm7_511.jpg[/img][img]/forums/attachments//bsm8_101.jpg[/img]

Dont tell me I am wrong about what this law means, I just dropped a boatload of proof in your lap, and all you have done is talk out your back side. Why would Encore be getting sued like this otherwise? Why would Encore be settling so many lawsuits out of their own pockets if they were not wrong? Why would 88 cases be present, dismissed with prejudice against Encore if you people knew the law and followed it?

Dude, hang it up. youre done here. You lost. Now, if only you put that effort into learning the legal way to do your job, we wouldnt have to have this thread in the first place.

I got a letter today from Encore Receivable Management stating i owe this credit card $25++.00 something and the amount due is $ 650. Do I call this guys? I cant afford to pay the $650 up front.

cajuan ive already noticed many inacuracys in your statments on this forum id like to know tho the hell you think you are to question some of the people on here? what background do you have? ive been a ver succsesfull collector and settlment rep and financial advisor over the last 7 years, not one fdcpa complaint not one issue or fine and ive made over 120,000 a year on adverage so please tell me why your answers somehow hold a stronger power than that of myself.....idbe quite intreged to here it.....and yea calling 3x and only leaving 1 msg would never be consided harasment we gotta get paid to you know, yea ive known collectors who lost there house from fines even sent to jail....but 90% they are more educated then the dtr and pay there damn bills

[skydivr7673]

wow....um, yeah....

grammar like that, and you want us to believe that you make six figures?! who's gonna trust a financial advisor that cant read, write, or speak the language?? A financial advisor works in an official capacity....who in the world would EVER use a financial advisor that uses the english language like he slept under a bridge last night? Financial professionals are EDUCATED....if they let you through college, then someone should be arrested!!!

More holes in your story--

1--how many collectors out there make that kind of money?? The HONEST ones DONT....there's a clue for you.

2--you havent had one single violation of the fdcpa?? Since you yourself pointed out that most debtors arent educated on the law, what you REALLY are saying is that you have not been caught and sued over a violation....yet....but the odds are catching up, champ.....your day's coming.

3--

calling 3x and only leaving 1 msg would never be consided harasment

Funny--why does the law itself specifically include the wording "causing the telephone to ring" as part of the violation?? CLEARLY, the law says that no one needs to answer the phone for it to count against you. And you think that cajun got it wrong? wow.....just, wow....

4--

90% they are more educated then the dtr and pay there damn bills

Really?? So, the increasing trend of collection agencies filing bankruptcy is to be ignored, just because YOU say that 90% of collectors pay their bills?? Look, jack, I deal in FACTS, not your absolutely ridiculous BS. Illegal immigrants know the language better than you do, and yet we're supposed to think you have any credibility? Better run along now, chief, I hear K-Mart's hiring...

[skydivr7673]

By the way, inaccuracies, right?? Is that what you claim you caught cajun up in?? Allow me to demonstrate the only inaccuracy around here lately....YOU....

http://www.debtconsolidationcare.com...ut32032-1.html

SO....you say youre 22 years old in one thread, and on the very same day, in another thread, you claim to have been a collector and financial advisor for the last seven years, huh?

One moment, you're 22....and precisely thirteen minutes later, you claim you've been at it for the last seven years....and morons like you actually wonder why we call collectors liars?? I wasnt aware that 15 year old boys can be financial advisors...good job, bonehead!!

Can you say OWNED?? Yeah, I thought so...crawl back under your rock.

go back and read the thread i updated the information for you diver and causeing the phone to ring in anoyance would be breakign the law i should have been more specific if i called 3 times in a ROW that would be bad howeve every 3-4 hours 3 times a day making contact only one time s not a violation in any mean, and when you deal with larger deabt ammounts that can have 2-3 year payment arangements buildign a backend over a long period of time its actually very easy to make 6 figures not base of course mostly in bunus structure, and ill be the first to admit my typing skills or HORRIBLE but you dont hear me calling you a ***kin moron for jumping the gun and assuming that someone could never be smarter than yourself a debt colletor is a job nothing more nothing less i got great grades in school got a perfect mcas score and had a free ride into collage, i work it pays, not a collation agency goin under would have nothing to do with the collectors paying there bills would it? and furthermore i never said that there arnt horrible nasty law breaking collectors out there i simply stated i wasnt one of them....at all, and is it wrong to know the persons backgroud whos giving hundreds of people advice that they are no dought follwing word for word? and if he was wrong wouldnt people want to know that for there own financial reasons?

[skydivr7673]

you scored perfect on the MCAS....but your GRAMMAR AND SPELLING suck. Let's face facts--this aint a typing problem. You misspell half the words you type, and you leave several words out of your sentences altogether. That isnt a "my typing sucks" problem. It's a "my language skills suck" problem.

yeah, I saw your "update". And let me tell you, from an adult point of view, THERE IS NO WAY A COMPETENT FINANCIAL ADVISORY COMPANY WOULD HIRE A KID TO ADVISE ADULTS ON THEIR MONEY. That is, unless they want to have no credibility and be thought of as a complete joke.

By the way, just so you are aware, I am currently dealing with a CA that has called between 3 and 5 times a day. I am not home during the day, so the phone naturally doesnt get answered. My attorney disagrees with your "expert assessment" as to exactly what constitutes harassment and what doesnt. And let me tell you--when he speaks, I dont get a headache trying to decode and interpret his language skills, like we have to do with yours. Who do you think is going to have more credibility on this--an attorney that has practiced this kind of law for nearly two decades, or the "financial advisor wonder-kid" who cant spell simple words like "are" to save his life??

I will be sure to let you know the outcome of the lawsuit....as further proof. I know the law. I do my own research, and have professionally dealt with the law every day since 2001. We have cited cases where courts have upheld a harassment complaint over a CA calling six times in a week!! So dont tell me what it is and what it isnt....you clearly dont know the case law. I do.

No, we dont see you calling someone a moron, I am actually surprised you knew how to spell it properly!

And then--"you never said there werent nasty collectors out there...." Well, this is what you actually said, to refresh your memory--

"yea ive known collectors who lost there house from fines even sent to jail....but 90% they are more educated then the dtr and pay there damn bills "

So...90% of them are educated and pay their bills....would you like to elaborate on why illegal drug use is so prevalent in your industry, then? Care to inform me why lawsuits against CA's are on the rise, if 90% of those collectors are so highly educated and doing it right? Why do so many CA's have reputations as companies that break the fdcpa routinely? This isnt made-up stuff, this comes from the lawsuits that are filed each year! For example, Encore, which is the topic of this thread....over the last few years, Encore has been sued in federal court more than 80 times. NOT ONCE in all those cases did Encore win....the most common outcome was Encore choosing to settle out of court. That doesnt happen if Encore was "educated better than the debtors"....Encore would not be giving out money in settlements unless they felt they could not win their cases! Oh, and that is only the federal cases--many more were filed in state courts....