Creditor responsible for the actions of CA...

You know, I never thought about that before! In the cases where they break violations and such, it would seem that they could be responsible for their CAs', but that is probably wishful thinking!!

I am on the bandwagon if LVNV is! Their collection tactics go way out of bounds, along with the people they hire.

I think I am going to research that. If a creditor hired a collection agency to collect a debt for them, it makes sense to me that they (the creditor) would be liable for the actions of the collection agency. I'm unsure.

In order to have a successful argument, I think that you would need to prove negligence on the creditor's part in that: 1) the creditor had prior knowledge of the CA's wanton business practices; and 2) that the creditor had reason to believe the CA would continue to engage in such practices after retaining them.

I use my dad's business as a comparison (my dad owns a refrigeration repair company). Major ice cream & milk distributors often place their own equipment/freezers at the customers premises as a sales incentive to buy their product. When the equipment breaks down, my dad is contracted by the distributor to make a field service call to repair the equipment. Now if my dad goes to a Jewel store to fix a freezer, and out of my dad's negligence a person is electrocuted, then the liability will be on my dad and not the distributor who hired my dad, because the distributor acted in good faith. Unless the case can be made that the distributor knew of my dad's negligent behavior beforehand, yet still contracted his services, then the distributor may be held liable for their own negligence.

Or here's another scenario I thought of.... If one company contracts Fed-Ex to deliver goods to another company, and the Fed-Ex driver crashes his vehicle through their front window while making the delivery, can you go after the company who shipped the merchandise for damages? No, it would be a very hard case to prove the shipper was negligent.

Now I believe Resurgent and LVNV are either parent/subsidiary corporations, or they are closely held and share common ownership. I think you might be able to argue that the two companies are so closely related, and because of their business arrangement between each other, they would have to be aware of each other's activities and practices. So then you might just be able to hold LVNV responsible for Resurgent's actions.

Thanks, Mike.

Hope I'm not bothering anyone by floating these more outlandish ideas in this board. I've been having a major attack of thinking-outside-the-box-itis lately. I don't want to stir up anything in the public boards with mere speculation.

Here's another example of my affliction...

http://www.debtconsolidationcare.com/mod/thread56422.html