logo

Debtconsolidationcare.com - the USA consumer forum

Collection Firm Settles Charges

Date: Wed, 11/07/2007 - 17:46

Submitted by Law Student
on Wed, 11/07/2007 - 17:46

Posts: 1182 Credits: [Donate]

Total Replies: 5


Nov. 6, 2007, 11:29PM
Collection firm settles charges
Houston-based company will pay $1.4 million in harassment case


By CINDY GEORGE
Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle


A Houston-based debt collection company has agreed to pay $1.4 million to settle federal charges that its agents illegally threatened and harassed consumers.

The Federal Trade Commission said Tuesday that LTD Financial Services LP used false threats of legal action and wage garnishment to collect debts. The company is also accused of calling people at work and using racial slurs and profanity.

Agents, who spoke in English and Spanish, collected on 1.25 million accounts per year in all 50 states, the federal complaint said.

According to the company's Web site, LTD employs more than 800 people and ranks among the nation's 25 largest debt collectors.

The complaint names LTD owners Timothy Feldman and Leonard Pruzansky as well as vice presidents John Brewster and Derrek Davis, who managed the company's sites in Houston and San Antonio.

Tom Carter, a senior trade commission attorney based in Dallas, said the case is significant because of the large civil penalty and the personal implication of the company's owners.

"We hope this makes a statement to the industry that you have to apprise yourself of what your company is doing and apprise yourself of the law," Carter said.

"They can harass and threaten people into paying money that they owe, but it's not right for the company to keep money that they got as a result of their violations."

The agreed-upon settlement, which is not an admission by the company, will be final when approved by a federal judge.

LTD's Washington, D.C.-based lawyer, David Medine, referred calls to the company. Attempts to reach LTD were unsuccessful late Tuesday.

In a statement, the company said it was "puzzled about why we were chosen for investigation" because information it received from the FTC in a Freedom of Information Act request indicated that its "complaint ratio" was "lower than most other major collection agencies," The Associated Press reported.

Consumers can file complaints at www.ftc.gov/ftc/complaint.shtm or by calling 877-FTC-HELP.


Awful funny when the company's own attorney referred calls for comment back to the company. Don't the attorneys usually speak for the company during things like this? Or am I confused?

I like the comment about their "complaint ratio" being lower than most other CA's. Is that standard of quality in that industry? How low their complaint ratio is? Although, you could look at it as not always being about quantity, sometimes it's the quality (or lack thereof in this case) that matters.

Thanks for posting this, LawStudent, something to give me good dreams tonight.

I won't be so worried about the Evil Monkey in my closet tonight! :lol:


lrhall41

Submitted by FloridaRon on Wed, 11/07/2007 - 18:10

( Posts: 1190 | Credits: )


David Medine is just some guy they hired, and probably doen't know the truth of the matter himself. That's one reason that there's no way I'd represent a collection agency. They lie to themselves and their attorneys. I don't blame Mr Medine. I wouldn't want to get caught up in their cycle of lies and deceit either, at the risk of losing a license to practice law.


lrhall41

Submitted by Law Student on Thu, 11/08/2007 - 00:35

( Posts: 1182 | Credits: )


Referring to attorney disclipine disbarring is a serious action by a bar commission.You would have to find out from bar if it is temporary or permanent. Temporary would refer to a set period in time. Most attorneys can appeal to the state supreme court but it would be difficult to fight as the court rarely goes against the established commission's rules & orders.


lrhall41

Submitted by cajunbulldog on Thu, 11/08/2007 - 05:41

( Posts: 4850 | Credits: )


In New York, it's a little bit more sticky. Usually it's an appellate district (11th is more often seen than not) that commences a grievance hearing to determine charges and summons attorney in question. If attorney answers charges (in said proceeding), there will be commencement of an investigative hearing and said action is forwarded to the respective appellate division department (1st, 2nd, 3rd or 4th) and the appellate court (as it is run like an appeal) determines the length of service.

In New York, typically on anything but major misconduct, if you're an attorney who answers the charges, you can be anything from censured all the way up to a 3 year temporary disbarment after which you must reapply to be an attorney, satisfy the misconduct in question, perform the missed CLE (continuing legal education) and sit for the bar. So yes, you can be readmitted under this scenario.

Second scenario of permanent disbarment is not so permanent in some circumstances. If you are disbarred in NY for anything but crimes and stealing from your clients, you may choose to pursue an LLM (master's in law) degree and restart the process to become an attorney. This would ensue a new degree (in the masters), 100 credits in CLE over the course of 3 years, satisfying any prior misconduct and re-taking the bar exam. After this, you may reapply to become an attorney.

It varies state by state, but in more liberal ones like NY, even permanently disbarred attorneys can be admitted to the bar as new attorneys despite prior actions.


lrhall41

Submitted by on Thu, 11/08/2007 - 21:05

( Posts: | Credits: )