"Tips for debt collectors"

http://sjglover.com/blog/index.php/2007/09/29/tips-for-debt-collectors-developing-a-good-collection-formula/

Tips for debt collectors: ???????Developing a Good Collection Formula???????



This article from Rick at Locate Services, LLC (PDF copy), an Ohio debt buyer, discusses how debt collectors calculate their ???????debt collection formula,??????? or the percentage of the debt for which they will settle.

In addition to an interesting look into the collection process, the article contains valuable information for consumers who may be trying to settle a debt with a debt collector.

For example, Rick writes:



In other words, debt collectors would love to get a payment in full, but will almost always settle for less. Some money is better than no money, after all. Additionally, each debt collector works for a percentage of the payments and promises to pay that they get from debtors. Getting a settlement for 60% or 80% of the debt is obviously better for the debt collector or the debtor than getting nothing, and debt collectors themselves are strongly motivated to accept settlements.

The article also differentiates between ???????fresh??????? debt and other debt. Fresh debt is often easier to collect, so the more recent the debt, the greater the percentage the debt collector will expect to get. And since the owner of the debt determines the settlement percentage, the debt collector may not be able to accept less than 80%, in the article????????s example.

Consumers can use this information to get an idea what to expect if and when a debt collector comes calling. Of course, if the debt ends up in litigation, the scenario usually changes, and a consumer must answer the lawsuit or risk forfeiting the entire amount. In my experience, debt collection law firms usually will not consider settlement, hoping in most cases for a default judgment if the consumer does not answer, in writing, within the statutory time frame (usually 20 days).

So are you saying that we as debtors won't necessarily get the original application but instead get an affadavit. The problem I have with this is the authenticity of the affadavit, how do we know it is for real, these collectors pull all kinds of crap to try and collect money. What do you suggest we do to authenticate the affadavit and make sure it is not bogus besides subpeona the signer? any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

In debt buyer cases, I have never seen an original credit application with the consumer's signature on it, or anything else with the consumer's signature, for that matter (except, perhaps, an occasional letter, or maybe a check, in some cases).

No affidavit can replace the original agreement, unless signed by someone who has actual knowledge that the consumer signed the agreement. Since most consumers do not sign credit agreements in front of an employee of the credit card company, this is unlikely.

What I am pointing out is that debt buyers (a debt collector who has purchased a debt from a creditor or another debt buyer) can rarely, if ever, prove that they own a particular debt or that a particular consumer owes a particular debt.

So Sam, I guess this proves that the chain of custody is easily challenged and typically resolved in favor of the debtor?

Ownership and indebtedness can be successfully challenged by an attorney familiar with the issues who has carefully set up the case with the appropriate affirmative defenses and discovery requests.

I don't know how easy that is, especially for a consumer representing herself or himself, but I know there are a lot of problems with chain of custody and evidence of indebtedness in every debt buyer lawsuit I have seen.

BTW...nice to see you again, Sam! :-)

Is there a law on the books somewhere about this affadavit. How would one present this in arbitration. WWR has refused to validate. Actually stated that I had no right to the information in the discovery motion.

I'm not sure what you are talking about. There is not one particular affidavit. Are you talking about an affidavit that the debt collector may produce in place of the credit agreement? As I said above, such an affidavit is only proof if the affiant actually saw the signed credit agreement.

Arbitration is a different case than court, though. Discovery and evidentiary rules are different, which changes everything.

All told, these are subtle legal arguments to make, and hiring an attorney is a better course than trying to go it alone.

My case is with CACH, they have WWR suing me, they sent me a summons Dec 06, We have went back and forth on dv, which I did not feel they provided, they only sent a copy of the bill, later what I feel is a bogus affadavit. When I pursued a further request through discovery for a copy of the paperwork that gives them the right to collect this debt or any form ownership, they sent it back, (in bright blue marker) Defendant has no right to this information. Here about a month ago, I got a preacipe for arbitration in the mail. When I called the prothonotaries office, she stated that they had not paid any of the fees necessary to file this paperwork and nothing else would happen until they do. I think it is just another scare tactic, don't know if they will follow through. In the beginning of this mess, they tried to get me to do a judgement by consent and I refused. I think they should prove they either own it or have the right to collect it, which I have requested several times via certified mail, return reciept and filed everything I have done with the courts. What are your thoughts, is this just another scare tactic, should they not have known that there are fees that go along with filing the praecipe with the court. I am ready to pay the fees to force them to court.

I had another case similar to this and they followed through very quickly with their intentions, They threatened, they sued, got a court date, paid them off, continuances were filed until the matter was resolved. That is why I think the above is just a scare tactic, It has been almost a year now with the CACH saga, where the other one was over in thirty days. The only difference is the one that is over was representing the original creditor, the CACH, WWR one is a debt collector that purchased the debt. They have payments that they said I made that they will not produce documentation for, I didn't make them, so I can't produce it either, thinking this was to keep it in SOL. I want it to go to court to get it over with. Any advice you have would be great. thanks

First, I don't give out any advice on a public forum. I do give out information, but nothing I post here should be news to anyone familiar with the fdcpa or debt collection generally.

Second, you are using a lot of terms that are not familiar to me, which means you are probably not in Minnesota, and so I don't have any advice I could give, anyway.

Ok, thanks, I am from Pennsylvania. I will still read your posts to see if there is anything that would apply to me anyway. thanks for being here.