Mini Miranda Warning - Is anybody aware of this

hey nobody said all collectors are bad.in fact i worked with a few that did work with me,sent me a letter,validated the debt,and above all else helped me with payments.your point may be true about the empathy.just know places are posted about on here for a reason my friend.people do have beefs with BOFA,but never with the collectors from what i gather here.

TO #13 Attorney41 YOUR A MORON! And obviously never passed a bar exam.The Court's decison states Edwards v. Niagara Credit Solutions, Inc., US Dist. Ct., N.D. Ga, Atlanta, '08 « on: June 09, 2010 05:13:24 PM »NOTE: This case was the subject of two separate decisions. I shall present the cases in the order they were considered. The first one is from 2008; the second one from 2009._____________________________________________ __________________________This decision states that: 1.) A debt collector who leaves a message on a voice mail or answering machine which fails to meaningfully identify them as a debt collector violates the FDCPA; 2.) A message can be held to violate, even if the word "debt" is not used, if the wording and/or context can reasonably be held to infer that the call is from a debt collector (such as "important business matter" or a file number); 3.) The "bona-fide error" defense fails if the debt collector deliberately violates one section of the FDCPA to avoid violating another; 4.) A debt collector is not entitled to be able to use any and all methods to collect if some such methods would violate the FDCPA in their use, even if such methods are more efficient to the bill collector.LEARN TO READ BEFORE YOU EMBARRASS YOURSELF BUDDY!which means a debt collector must let you know that this is an attempt to collect a debt...let's break it down some more for those who are slow.A debt collector can't call you and say this is courtney lane call me back at 800-655-4444THAT'S a VIOLATION of the FDCPA. They must state the reason for the call period.Good day to all the Idiots

"you ***** should just pay your bills instead of finding a way of sueing companys just trying to get there money back. or just drink bleach and die!! if you hate having debts."

Nice. Excellent ability to communicate your message to the public!

As mentioned by one of the posters, and contrary to the debt collector's information above, the law is clear in the Eleventh Circuit... Edwards v. Niagara Credit Solutions, No. 08-17006 (11th Cir 2009), http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200817006.pdf states in pertinent part: "the Act does not guarantee a debt collector the right to leave answering machine messages." Obviously, if you can't leave a mini miranda, and you have to identify yourself... then "don't leave messages" appears to be the better solution. You may also note that this case is also published on the ACA citation site (major Debt collectors all belong to the ACA: The Association of Credit and Collection Professionals) to warn debt collectors.

It is a shame the above poster (as is usual) was never trained on proper collection techniques, but that would be too expensive to actually train people before they violate the law (and of course, put attorneys who practice prosecuting FDCPA violations, out of work).

But some courts have ruled that by giving the listener ample opportunity to disconnect or make sure no one else is listening, that agencies aren't in violation. The have made it equal to openning some else's mail. The main problem here is that the FTC refuses to clarify what is OK and has left it to the courts to decide and they are not all agreeing, The FTC needs to get off the pot and either say agencies cannot leave messages or that they are not violating 3rd party disclosure by leaving the Foti message. They have been dragging their feet on this for years.

Also add to this, it is much easier to prove that Foti was violated that it is to prove that a 3rd party heard it without intent.

Here's a question. When my fiance called to find out what the collection agency was trying to collect on, she was not read her mini miranda and then was placed on hold "please hold i have another call coming in" and was not even given time to say yes or no. When the agent returned to her line, my fiance immediately requested to speak with a supervisor, when transfered to supervisor, he also did not read the mini miranda.
I myself had to act as mediator due to the fact that the supervisor was not being clear as to why the sum was so large(was also hard to understand his accent{middle eastern}) and that my fiance was becoming frustrated. When we brought up the subject of not being "mini mirandized" he asked us to inform him of the name of the original agent, we could not understand original agent's accent therefore we could not tell the supervisor the original agent's name. The supervisor then informed us that he would look into whom it was that received our call initially and to call back in 15 mins.
When we called back, of course whomever answered the line read a mini miranda. We were then retransfered to the supervisor who also read the mini miranda when he answered his line. Then tried to say that we were read it and that it now counts.
My question is: Is there anything that could be done about this?

Yes, You can ask the supervisor to listen to the recording since all the collection calls are recorded but be sure that you will not embarrass yourself before asking to listen to the recording.

yeah sure all collection calls are recorded.if that is the case then why when i have had people i know contend that.they mystreiously can't play the call back?i love how you people come on with stupidity.yes i know legit collectors do monitor and record calls,and bottomfeeding slime claim to as well,but we all know that bottomfeeding slime really don't.as if they want threats of arrest,immediate legal action,and garnishment on a tape that can be legally taken and played in court.i thought so.

Compliance is key to running a successful office. The mini miranda is a good discussion especially when dealing with unlawful or non compliant companies. Just please, lets not lump all collectors together as liars and theives. Some of us work for reputable banks and merchandisers. It is in our best interest to maintain our customers, not threaten and violate. Not all agencies buy debt. Like ours, we are an in house collections department for a major chain retailer. Yes we want the money, no we don't want to lose a lifelong customer over $50. We just want to help clear up this matter amicably and help our customers through what has been one heck of a recession. We understand that sometimes things happen and we all need to prioritize where our money goes. That said, it doesn't relieve us of our obligations to repay that which we rightfully owe when our personal conditions improve.
BTW, our company using the mini miranda when speaking to the actual customer/debtor, all mail and correspondence but never leaves it on an answering machine. It leaves open the possibility that we might accidently disclose information (even just the fact that you owe a debt) to a third party. Our lawyers tell us that this is a safe, reliable approach, that has been approved by our state and federal authorities.

It is "the debt collector is attempting to collect a debt and that any information obtained will be used for that purpose." (FDCPA § 807. False or misleading representations #11).

I see there is a discussion about voice mail message. I must refer you to FOTI VS NCO. That is the reason for the whole pauses and to say hang up or discontinue listening now. It's to provide the information to the consumer (mini-miranda warning) without disclosing the information to a 3rd party. You would have to give a compelling case how your message was listened to a 3rd party and how they told them you owed a debt. Some collection agencies leave messages others don't.