Debtconsolidationcare.com - the USA consumer forum

Collectors Ask FCC to let them call cell phones

Date: Wed, 04/19/2006 - 18:34

Submitted by mwtx
on Wed, 04/19/2006 - 18:34

Posts: 22 Credits: [Donate]

Total Replies: 18


Remember the rumour about how telemarketers would soon start calling your cell phone? Now the collection industry is asking the FCC to close the loophole that disallowed that. Collectors and telemarketers alike would be eating up your cell phone minutes. Personally I don't see how it would be legal, because you'd be paying for the call, just as if it were reversed charges, or collect. The article is from a collection industry website.

Washington Post Covers Collectors-Against-FCC Autodialer Battle

April 19, 2006

The Washington Post, in its Wednesday edition, is covering ACA International's attempt to close an FCC loophole that bars debt collectors from using automated dialers to contact cell phone numbers.
The article, appearing on page 2 in the Business section, references the ACA's position that the ban on collectors auto-dialing cell phones was inadvertent and that the collection industry got caught up in the FCC's crackdown on telemarketers using autodialers to contact cell numbers.

Rozanne Andersen, ACA's general counsel and SVP of Government Affairs, noted in the article that the cell phone numbers used by collection agencies were given to creditors by consumers at the time of credit application. This stands in contrast to the behavior of telemarketers that the FCC is attempting to curtail.

The National Consumer Law Center is objecting to the ACA's effort to lift the autodialer ban. The NCLC's argument is that autodialers will run up consumers' cell phone daytime minutes and, according to the Post article, "a consumer giving a cellphone number when applying for credit shouldn't be considered as giving permission to a debt collector to call that number later."

The ACA is still encouraging the debt collection industry to take advantage of the FCC's pubic comment period. ACA International members should use this link to access more information and a sample letter to send to the FCC. Non-members who wish to get involved should email btimm(at)acainternational.org.


set4sail, no it's not legal, yet, and probably won't be in future.

I'd seriously think of suing them. I'd also urge anyone who has this sort of problem, complain to the FTC. I recently read the FTC Report of the fdcpa for 2006, released a few days ago. It says that complaints from the consumer is how they learn about transgressions by collectors. Enough complaints about a company, such as Sherman Aquisitions and NCO, and they are investigated and fined.

Complaints about collectors breaking the law are up again (over 14% over last year). This now makes complaints about collectors their top category.


lrhall41

Submitted by mwtx on Wed, 04/19/2006 - 21:02

( Posts: 22 | Credits: )


They are a third party collector. Cap One has retained them to collect debts. The collector's name is on letters, etc.

For some reason Cap One is fond of this "cloak and dagger" scheme. Several years ago, they were using a team of criminals out of Houston called Risk Management Alternatives in the same manner. Of course, Allied will probably pretend not to be third party. They've lied and extorted more than organised crime ever thought of doing.


lrhall41

Submitted by mwtx on Wed, 04/19/2006 - 21:22

( Posts: 22 | Credits: )


I have a setting on my cell phone that I can block all unknown name unknown number and I will be enabling that feature. These collection agencies and telemarketers will not be using my minutes to threaten or try to sell me something. Last night after reading this post, I listed my hubby and my cell phone on the do not call list.


lrhall41

Submitted by Not so Lucky on Thu, 04/20/2006 - 04:14

( Posts: 3041 | Credits: )


(tammy)

Many cell phones also have a "personal" and "business" setting for differnet rings. I put anyone who should have my number in the "personal" setting. I don't answer any calls with the "business" ring. If a message is left, I call up my voicemail from my home phone (this way it doesn't cost anything).


lrhall41

Submitted by mwtx on Fri, 04/21/2006 - 22:32

( Posts: 22 | Credits: )


Why give them you cell in the 1st place?

I have learned. In the future the only number I am giving out is my home. I am not givig out any cell or work numbers. Especially work number. They don't have a right to have that as someone else is paying for your time not them.


lrhall41

Submitted by Glynnie11 on Sun, 04/23/2006 - 11:19

( Posts: 216 | Credits: )


I've given out the cell phone number because I can turn it off. If I don't recognize the number I don't answer. And I've noticed we receive almost no telemarketing calls at home, and I've only received one or two on my cell phone. The only real reason we have a home phone now is the unlimited any time long distance through the cable modem, and fax capability, for $25 a month. lol I know I would have spent more than that on faxing documents in the last month, at the rate I've been going. But that's what works best for us.


lrhall41

Submitted by set4sail on Sun, 04/23/2006 - 11:49

( Posts: 412 | Credits: )


Lessismore,

That's one of the reasons we went to Vonage. Also, since all of our family is in other states, we make a lot of long distance phone calls lol.

After I fax a document, I print out the fax log and staple the papers together. In the last month I would have spent at least $30 on outgoing faxes, so it really helps. Somewhere we have an old e-fax number, plus I noticed that Earthlink now does incoming e-fax with their mail server. Haven't tried that yet.


lrhall41

Submitted by set4sail on Tue, 04/25/2006 - 15:02

( Posts: 412 | Credits: )