Leaving phone messages violations

Cease and desist has no legal effect until there is proof of any violation done. You will have to send the letter through certified mail with return receipt requested. By law, a debt collector is not supposed to call after receiving the letter. If they do, you have a case against them for violating the fdcpa. Monitor your credit report closely if they are hitting anything negative in it. This might be an added point of their violations because they haven't validated the debt and anything reported in your credit will be considered unauthorized reporting.

I get that same type of phone call from another company and they will say that you have 3 seconds to hang up the phone, otherwise they assume it is you 9and this is on my voice mail). The only thing they don't give is the debt amount or anything else. I don't know about the fdcpa laws, but it certainly seems wrong the way they are leaving messages.

From what I understand, if leaving a message, the verbiage has to be to the effect that they are debt collector, or a debt collection company. They have to inform you that the call is in regard to collecting a debt. That all information acquired is for that distinct purpose. I'm not the attorney around here but that's what I understand the law to be.

This is how I interpret cease and desist violations. If I've sent a letter via certified mail with return receipt, and I receive attempts to communicate with me verbally after I have the return receipt in my possession, I consider that a violation. If they are attempting to communicate with you verbally before they've received the letter, how would they know? I've had success during a telephone conversation in telling a CA not to communicate with me verbally. But, I backed it up in writing to reinforce my position.

A collector must identify themselves with the purpose of their call. Mini Miranda clause is just about this. After doing the first call, they must send the debt in writing within 5 business days. If the laws are not being followed, record their calls after verifying your state laws. The recording will help in pursuing legal actions.

fjv4, I believe you're mistaken. I'm pretty sure that the fdcpa actually prohibits leaving explicit details like that in a voice-mail due to the possibility that an unauthorized person could hear the message. Most of the voice mails I've received do *not* give those kinds of details; what I typically get instead is "This is Mr. Smith calling for Mr. *** regarding an urgent personal matter [or sometimes "business matter". Please return my call at yadda-yadda." The only messages I've ever gotten on my machine that give explicit details have been from the ones who have confirmed, by speaking to me personally, that the number they're calling actually is mine; even that much is a little dicey.

Your interpretation of the cease-comm portion of the FDCPA is correct -- the cease-comm order is to cease *all* communication, not just communication of any particular type. Any attempts to communicate after a cease-comm are therefore a violation of the FDCPA, except for the "one more contact" that the CA gets to declare its intentions.

Actualy that isn't true. A collection agency can make contact one more time to explain to you what is going to happen now to the account.

After that they can not call.

Yes, FYI, that's what I meant -- I thought that was what my post said. My apologies if I was unclear.

I know the calls your talking about Outlaw.I remember reading somewhere about those kinds being questionable under the fdcpa.I need to start saving the articles i find.

Are they computer generated calls and when they say your name its garbled and hard to understand what they are actually saying?

If i remember the article correctly it said something along the lines of it not violating the fdcpa ,because if it states that your not "John Smith" to hang up. This is only my opinion but those kind of calls should be illegalbecause in a matter of only a few seconds they go on to state who they are and what they want.If someone else were to answer more then likely they would hear that also before they had the chance to hang up.It's similiar to 3rd party disclosure.

I got those on mine and my mother and daughter answered it before.My daughter asked what a debt collector was and i explained to her but told her it was a wrong number.It's my concern not hers and was very angry when she had to hear it.


I would think even if its a computer generated message they should not be allowed to even state that they are a debt collector like some do.And the mini miranda warning only is for letters and if speaking verbally to the debtor , not messages.

The FDPCA only states that a collector may not communicate directly with a third party. If they have sufficient reason to believe they are calling your phone number and leaving a message on your recorder, they can say anything that they would otherwise say to you directly if you had answered.

To play a "what if" situation is not proof of any wrongdoing... "what if they left that message on someone else's voicemail and it wasn't really mine" ... IF they did actually leave it on someone else's voicemail THEN they would be guilty of violating fdcpa. But to come up with scenarios of what COULD have happened is merely a correlation without causation. The fact that they did actually leave it on your recorder, and you did in fact receive the message, does not make them guilty of anything.

When we say "Well what IF my spouse checks the answering machine?" In the same section of the FDCPA that says a debt collector cannot communiate with a third party, is also says "(d) For the purpose of this section, the term "consumer" includes the consumer's spouse, parent (if the consumer is a minor), guardian, executor, or administrator."

So then we bring into play "what if my mom or kids check the voicemail?" For that matter, what if a neighbor walks into your house and presses the Play button? Well, it is YOUR answering maching. That would be akin to somebody else opening your mail and reading it. If a collector has in good faith directed a communication to your attention, then they are not responsible for your lack of safeguards in place on the receiving end that would otherwise prevent someone else from accessing your "mail." If you don't want your kids to hear a collection message, then tell them not to press play on your answering machine.

1ST off I am not here to argue with anybody.2nd I am just expressing my opinion on the matter.3rd I was not talking about answering machine messages in my case. I was talking about the computer generated calls that take about 25 seconds and say if you are not so and so please hang up and immediatley after go on to state
who they are and what they want.

I never said it was illegal I was just saying unethical.Most collection calls just ask the debtor to call back, leaving a reference number,phone number,and that it is an important business matter.Outlaw and i were referring to the calls leaving all information to the fact that its a debt collector calling on machines or the computer generated calls that tell you if your not "john Smith" to please hang up,then go into the whole spill that were attourneys or whoever in the practice of debt collections and so on.
And in these calls the name is so garbled most time you cant even tell what name they are saying.
And as far as my kids go I have voicemail so I dont have to worry about them hitting the button. They do not even know how to get to the voicemail.

I f you have never gotten one of these calls just put yourself in that position. Say your having some friends over for dinner and you forget to turn off your machine then you get one of these calls and now your friends know your whole business.. How embarrassing would that be for you?

I wasn't trying to be condescending so I am sorry if it came off that way. I was just trying to make a point that, as long as it's your recorder/voicemail, they can pretty much say anything they would say to you in person - and it's not their fault if other people check your messages.

I know all companies are different, but from my own experience I don't start leaving details right off the bat. I usually leave the generic "This is DebtCruncher from ABC Finance Corp, please call me back at 555-1234" and I'll leave that same message for a couple of weeks. After it becomes apparent the customer is just deleting my messages and not returning the call, then I need to put a little "Oomph" into the message to let them know the problem won't go away by ignoring it. I have threatened people with lawsuits in a voicemail and stated "if you don't make arrangements by XXX day, then it will be sent to the attorney for suit." And that's not just a threat, I really would have sent it to the attorney. 9 times out of 10, that's enough to get a person to call me.

Hey its you whos calling my house..No I'm just messing with you.I see your point.

I and some others I'm sure just think the computer generated collection calls left on machines stating full details are a little unethical.If the company had previously talked to the person and knows 100% that their getting the right number that should be fine.But not if they had never verbally talked with such person.

I get calls like that for a man who used to have my number ,he still lives in my town so now I know his whole business.

Now as for the original question they are not breaking any fdcpa violations by the type of calls they are making.But I would think it is against fdcpa codes if they are still calling after a cease and desist letter was sent.But from this original post i'm not sure if it was sent mail too or just verbally said to colectors.

DebtCruncher: maybe you can clear this up. Does cease and desist have no effect if not done by mail just verbally? You are very helpful when it comes to these things.

We actually have an odd arrangement where I work. I take the loan apps and give out the loans. If the loans get to be delinquent, I call them up until they're 30 days past-due. Then I hand them off to our collector. He works them until they're over 90 and then hands them back to me to figure out what we should do with them, be it lawsuits, repos, etc.

We don't have an automatic dialer or computer system making our calls for us, so we can usually tell who is answering the phone and who the number belongs to. I have lot's of times where the customers give us their mom's house number when they get a loan, or they give us a friends cell phone # to call them on. If I know that someone other than the customer is answering the phone, we don't go into details about the debt. Common sense, if you ask me...

But yes, the computerized part of it does take out that factor of being able to tell who actually answers. I've only heard the automated calls that leave a phone # and maybe a reference number. I have yet to hear a computer going into details about the balance or anything else. Not that I'm saying it's not possible. I would think it is a little unethical in that the machine does not know who it's releasing information to and, if it is calling a wrong number, it has know way of knowing.

Now, regarding the cease & desist letter... I think that it would need to be presented in writing for it to be effective. The text of the fdcpa also states this:

Keep in mind, though, the FDCPA only applies to collection agencies, not to the original creditor. Sending a c&d letter to your creditor will have no legal effect. I have actually had a few customers send me c&d letters, and in it they quote the FDCPA and threaten to sue me if I ever call them again. I usually write a letter back and say "Since you seem to be well-read on our laws, please re-read the beginning definitions set forth in 1692a and you will clearly see that by definition of a debt collector, I am not."

Can anyone tell me ASAP what is this company and telephone number? I need to call them and I don't know who they may be representing = I think it is a pay day loan company - help please - let me know

need the name & number first dduvall............

The problem is what is known as the Foti ruling which now requires agencies to leave the extended message. By stating who the call is for and advising to listen in private, many courts have ruled in favor of the agencies, because the agencies made every attempt to make sure the correct person heard it. Also, it is much easier to prove that Foti was violated than it is to prove 3rd party disclosure.

I just got a call from a local business about a NSF check that was written to their business and they said that if I don't pick up this check by monday they would then drop off the check at the local police department. My message is generic and I'm not the only person living at my residence so anyone can hear this. Usually when something of that nature happens they just say to have whoever they are calling for to please call them back about a personal financial matter. They don't spell out what the issue is and don't make threats. My question is, is it legal to do this?

The local business is not a collection agency and thus they can say anything they want. They are not governed by the FDCPA. And a lot of businesses do use the police department to assist in check collections.....