Original Creditor vs Collection
Date: Thu, 01/17/2008 - 06:08
I have an issue and I am going to apply what I believe to be true (from my observations here). PLEASE correct me when I error . .
I have unsecured installment/signature loan with a local company (Illinois). Yes, I voluntarily signed a WAGE ASSIGNMENT.
I am a union worker; in the midst of contract renewal. There is a possibility that it will require federal mediator intervention. In the interim, Im not spending the $ I have now; can we say s-t-r-i-k-e.
Ive been in contact with the loan company; the regular rep has moved to another store & the current clerk claims to know nothing of my situation. Right.
I've explained my position. I am more then willing to make some arrangements AFTER our next vote; please note that I am FOUR days past due.
I have already sent a revoke letter to them on the wage assignment; via fax (I have confirmation sheet) and also regular USPS (not certified my bad).
Yesterday I received a 'Notice of Intent to Assign Wages'. Ive researched a few aspects as it related to Illinois:
1. The original Wage Assignment did NOT state that the assignment would be revoked at will (VIOLATION).
2. The Notice of Intent is valid if :
'employee has defaulted on the debt secured by the assignment for more then 40 DAYS (Im not 40 days late; Im 4).
Also inclucded was an interesting letter stating 'We are trying to work with you BEFORE your account does go into collections. Once it goes to our collection department, they will RELENTLESSLY (their capitalization not mine) pursue this matter. By doing so, they will call you ona daily basis, and proceed with your wage garnishment and whatever else means they legally can obtain to garnish you as well (??).
Lastily: 'you should be compelled to make good on this account even if this means borrowing mponey from family, friends . . '
Questions: I've revoke the assignment; why the intent notice; isnt that illiegal with the revoke?
2. Is it a scare tactic? Do I proceed by responding with 'a valid legal defense' or do I write to them ie: Intent invalid; assignment revoked. Do I leave it alone & present the fact in court when they go for garnish? (If I have no paycheck - the garnishment is not a priority for me; my 5 year old son is. You cant get blood from a turnip!)
3. RE: the 'relentless' phone calls; under the fdcpa; does a 'stop collection calls' letter apply to in house collections for the original creditor?
I hope that Im not all over the place with this. I dont have a fast computer; searching for the info in the 'search' on the site; is not an option. Plus Ive never read of anyone having my situation.
For the record, Im not running from this loan; I wanna pay it; but I CAN NOT take any monetary action until the contract issue is settled & I have secured a paycheck for the next 36 months.
I appreciate ANY and ALL assistance. Thank You!!
1. Yes, they can't override your state law. 2. Big Time! I woul
1. Yes, they can't override your state law.
2. Big Time! I would put it right in their face.
3. Not really sure, I guess it also depends on if "their collection department" is really theirs.
Also if they threatened to garnish me in addition to my paycheck, I would be like: "Fine then, if you really must! I'll have a sprig of parsley" :wink:
Thanks JCEMT; I should or should not respond directly to them;
Thanks JCEMT;
I should or should not respond directly to them; ie
violating federal/state law re:revoke. (or do I wait til garnish procedures & present fact in court?).
If I do respond to them; should I do so by regular letter or as an answer to 'Notice of Intent' (my legal defense response)
Thanks (JCEMT) !!! I am confident that the answers I need are here !!
Any idea on what to do if they do decide to start calling me every day? (within fdcpa. fyi - I wont hesitate to pursue my avenues if they violate FDCPA).
Turnabout is fair play!
fdcpa doesn't apply to the OC, not sure what law(s) does. The on
fdcpa doesn't apply to the OC, not sure what law(s) does. The only reason I would suggest waiting for it to go to court is if you want to trap them in a countersuit. If you don't want to go to court then present it as you previously stated in your last post.
Here's what I'd like to avoid; dragging my employer into this at
Here's what I'd like to avoid; dragging my employer into this at this stage; if there's a garnishment; fine. Actually if there's a paycheck; and then a legal garnishment - fine. I'd like to avoid dragging my employer into this; Im not even close to 40 days past due.
Here's a thought - do you think it wise to send a letter; stating the following:
Dear Mucky-muck:
1. Per my legal right; the voluntary wage ASSIGNMENT was revoked. See letter dated XX-XX-XXXX. If you wish to violate state/federal law; proceed with your threat to utilize the invalid 'assignment'. I will seek legal remedy as well.
Oh! Yes, and 2. When did I become 40 days in default?
Too much of a wise $%# ??? or good enough? I dont wanna 'show my hand' too early.
Don't include the wise @$$ remark. Simply state that if it were
Don't include the wise @$$ remark. Simply state that if it were not revoked state law prohibits wage assignment prior to being 40 days delinquent, and that as of todays date it is merely X days delinquent.
Gotcha - good advice. (Im too emotionally invloved here). Would
Gotcha - good advice. (Im too emotionally invloved here). Would you advise regular letter or response to the 'Intent'? (Send letter & see what happens?).
Outcome . . . my employer told the creditor to 'take a hike' and
Outcome . . . my employer told the creditor to 'take a hike' and unless they could produce a legal 'garnishment' from the court - my employer was not going to cooperate.
In addition, once they were notified of this & after the exchange of correspondence between them & I - they have agreed to a re-payment plan.
I'm not 100% comfortable with their word on the re-payment plan since the very-so-professional (NOT!) rep wouldnt confirm in writing !! Ugh!