Cash Call. I'm about to give up and give in...

Cash Call may be legal but Western Sky is not. Stick to your guns...

give in why... its uncollectable and illegal. don't be silly...

Put it this way: they want your money and they want to be paid. They are going to put you through the ringer until this happens. Don't play their game! You are in the right!

I'm scared. I have only read of two people who have successfully had Cash Call admit defeat, and the rest are taken to court, and who knows what will happen. It's frustrating because they can't even get their paperwork right! They sent me someone else's loan documents, and when Elissa Chavez sent me another letter in response to mine, she wrote the date wrong that the loan was funded! Meanwhile, they are negatively reporting on my credit, and I'm desperately trying to rebuild it. I've also heard a rumor that Nevada, where I live, could give a crap about protecting consumers. I feel backed into a corner!

Sorry but any loan originated by Western Sky is illegal. I handle my father's affairs and successfully got them to accept small monthly payments to pay back his loan that he onl made one payment on. You are probably losing the argument and ready to give in because you aren't sticking to your guns. You aren't telling them flat out "Then you're not getting another cent from me. Get your BS off my credit report or I will make it my personal goal to destroy your company, starting with the BBB and ending with the FTC". You are letting them bully you and it's working.

Waffles how long did that take? I just feel they are not going to accept an offer where I don't pay any more money...

About 3-4 months of fighting with them. You need to be disputing this with the bureaus via writing, being clear that it is illegal debt which you have paid off. You need to send it in the mail and include the relevant state laws. I mean like I told you previously, if you really are just at your wits end, you could tell CashCall you'll pay them 100 bucks to delete it from your report and consider the matter settled. Not sure if you're willing to go down that route. I wouldn't.

I sent Ms. Elissa Chavez my response to her letter, basically stating that I was not paying on this unenforcable contract any longer. Now I just have to fight the CRA's I included Nevada state installment loan laws that clearly state that the institution funding the loan has to be licensed in Nevada. We shall see how this pans out..

Hope everything works out well for you. Hang in there!

This is the response I got from Cash Call today. Now what do I do?


Ms. Labella-

We are in receipt of your correspondence. As stated in several letters to you, we will not be deleting the record, as we are required by law to report all credit information true and accurate. Furthermore, with respect to the enforceability of your loan, the agreement was made on the reservation when the lender approved the application and funded the loan. Also, you agreed to be bound by the terms of the loan contract you entered into with Western Sky and your loan agreement is both valid and enforceable. Additionally, the terms of the loan remain intact and the same as when you signed and executed your loan agreement. You do not dictate the terms of the loan.

In summary, this loan is valid and enforceable, and we have confirmed that his account balance is accurate and that we are reporting all credit information correctly for this loan.

We hope this response has addressed your concerns. We look forward to working with you to resolve this matter.


Sincerely,

Dispute Resolution Department

The Fort Laramie Treaty, 15 Stat. 635, between the United States and the tribes of the Sioux Nation, ???created the ???Great Reservation??? for the Sioux and set off lands ???for the absolute and undisturbed use and occupation of the Indians.??? ??? Calhoon v. Sell, 71 F.Supp.2d 990, 999 (D.S.D.199:cool: (guoting 15 Stat. 635) .FN8 Under the treaty, States may not ???interfere with reservation self-government??? or tax on-reservation activities. Rice, 463 U . S. at 718. This gives tribes the power to regulate ???the activities of nonmembers who enter consensual relationships with the tribe or its members, through commercial dealing, contracts, leases, or other arrangements,??? but only when the ???non-Indians [are] on their reservations.??? Id. at 565.FN9

Maybe CashCall should check with Western Sky before sending stupid responses! This is the disclaimer directly from the Western Sky website:

"WESTERN SKY FINANCIAL is owned wholly by an individual Tribal Member of the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe and is not owned or operated by the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe or any of its political subdivisions. WESTERN SKY FINANCIAL is a Native American business operating within the exterior boundaries of the Cheyenne River Sioux Reservation, a sovereign nation located within the United States of America."

Keep fighting... for Western Sky to be legal, they would have to operate as an arm of the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, which clearly they do not. Sovereign immunity may apply to the Tribe, but it does not extend to businesses owned or operated by individual Tribe members!

So... I spoke with an Naca lawyer today in Nevada. He listened, looked over the Western Sky contract, talked it over with his colleagues... And told me... There was nothing he could do to get me out of the contract! He said nothing could be done to Western Sky, and that my.state laws couldn't protect me because the loan originated on a reservation. He said he was just as shocked to find that out, and I should write my congressman. Now he said if Cash Call sued me for the money that changes the game... But for now, nothing could be done. He told me at this point, take the settlement deal, or just not pay, let my credit take the hit until it came off after seven years. So now what? The only thing left is he said he would check the laws on cash call reporting on my credit report. Now what?

He would "check" them? Find a better attorney

Is "QUACK" applicable to a lawyer??? While he is right in that WS themselves would be very tough to sue, the notion that cashcall is safe here too is crazy! Find a different naca attorney and research some reviews first!!

The problem is, this attorney is the only one from the naca that handles installment loans. He says he was just as shocked to find out that state laws would not apply, which makes no sense since everyone else says state laws prevail. So I'm now 100% at a loss... This is coming from a guy that went to school.for this!

Soaplady went to law school as well... I am in grad school for economics, not law, but when I did my bachelor's in political economy/international affairs I studied the hell out of constitutional law... the laws of a freaking Indian reservation do not supersede federal/state law... indian reservations only EXIST BECAUSE of those laws... This is bull. The attorney you are dealing with likely has never dealt with WS/CC because most people who have loans with them are not like you. They are not smart enough to look at the contract and say, hey, this is a load of crap. And on top of that most of them do not reach out to lawyers, so to give the guy you are dealing with a break he probably doesn't have much experience with it.

Quote:

I am also dealing with Ms. Chavez and she can bite me! I live in NJ and have been told point bank by the state banking and insurance my obligation is to the priniciple amount and not a penny more and then I only have to send payments I can afford. The investigator for NJ laughed at their tribal status claims and also stated NJ was issuing a cease and desist. When I spoke to Ms. Chavez she told me the State of NJ was wrong! Really? I then asked her how she was going to get access to me to drag me into tribal court and I was told they could call me on the phone and all cases were subject to federal law which is a change, since they have already stated tribal law triumphs. I then asked her if she was going to send US Marshalls or Tribal police to get me. Then I was told my credit would be ruined, but since the loans are illegal, I can have their claims removed. To be on the safe side, I entered into a debt management program and make payments to Cashcall through them, they have no access to my bank accounts. When you want to give up, think about how arrogant Ms. Chavez is and be motivated to stick it to her.

For Release: 03/07/2012
FTC Charges That Payday Lender Illegally Sued Debt-Burdened Consumers in South Dakota Tribal Court Without Jurisdiction
Agency Expands Its Case Against Payday Financial, LLC
The Federal Trade Commission expanded its case against an allegedly deceptive payday lender, charging that it sought to unfairly and deceptively manipulate the legal system and force debt-burdened consumers throughout the country to travel to South Dakota and appear before a tribal court that did not have jurisdiction over their cases.
In an amended complaint, the FTC charged that South Dakota-based payday lender Payday Financial, LLC???s suits against customers are unfair, and that its contract language about the court where such suits would be brought is deceptive. The amended complaint also seeks civil penalties for alleged violations of the Commission???s Credit Practices Rule. The company, its owner, Martin A. Webb, and several others named as defendants pitch short-term, high-fee, unsecured payday loans to consumers on television and the Internet.
When customers fall behind in their payments, Payday Financial, LLC improperly files suits against them in the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribal Court, attempting to obtain a tribal court order to garnish their wages, the amended complaint alleges. The tribal court does not have jurisdiction over claims against people who do not belong to the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe and who do not reside on the reservation or elsewhere in South Dakota.
In its original complaint filed in September 2011, the agency alleged that the defendants illegally tried to garnish employees??? wages without court orders. Under federal law, the government can directly require employers to garnish wages for debts it is owed without a court order, but private creditors must obtain a court order before garnishing a debtor???s wages. The FTC also alleged that the defendants violated the FTC Act by:
Falsely telling employers that they had the legal authority to garnish an employee???s wages without first obtaining a court order.
Falsely telling employers that they had given employees an opportunity to dispute a debt.
Unfairly disclosing the existence and the amounts of consumers??? supposed debts to their employers and co-workers, without the consumers??? knowledge or consent.
The defendants also allegedly violated the FTC???s Credit Practices Rule by requiring consumers taking out payday loans to consent to have wages taken directly out of their paychecks in the event of a default, and the Electronic Funds Transfer Act and Regulation E by requiring authorization for recurring electronic payments from their bank account as a condition of obtaining payday loans.
The amended complaint adds a civil penalties demand for the alleged Credit Practices Rule violation. Before filing the amended complaint to seek civil penalties, the FTC notified the Department of Justice, as required by statute, giving the department the opportunity to litigate the case. The Department of Justice stated that it would not initiate the proceeding, allowing the FTC to continue the litigation on its own behalf.
For more information regarding payday loans see: Payday Loans Equal Very Costly Cash: Consumers Urged to Consider the Alternatives.
The Commission votes approving the amendments to the complaint to seek civil damages and to add two new counts related to the improper suits in tribal court were 4-0, with Commissioner Edith Ramirez voting to approve the amendments to add civil penalties and an unfairness count, but dissenting on the addition of a deception count regarding contract language about the court where consumers could be sued. The amended complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of South Dakota Central Division on March 1, 2012. The amended complaint names as defendants Payday Financial, LLC, Great Sky Finance, LLC, Western Sky Financial, LLC, Red Stone Financial, LLC, Financial Solutions, LLC, Management Systems, LLC, 24-7 Cash Direct, LLC, Red River Ventures, LLC, High Country Ventures, LLC, and Martin A. Webb.
NOTE: The Commission files an amended complaint when it has ???reason to believe??? that the law has been or is being violated, and it appears to the Commission that a proceeding is in the public interest. The complaint is not a finding or ruling that the defendant has actually violated the law.
The Federal Trade Commission works for consumers to prevent fraudulent, deceptive, and unfair business practices and to provide information to help spot, stop, and avoid them. To file a complaint in English or Spanish, visit the FTC's online Complaint Assistant or call 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357). The FTC enters complaints into Consumer Sentinel, a secure, online database available to more than 2,000 civil and criminal law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and abroad. The FTC's website provides free information on a variety of consumer topics. Like the FTC on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.
MEDIA CONTACT:
Betsy Lordan
Office of Public Affairs
202-326-3707
STAFF CONTACT:
LaShawn Johnson
Bureau of Consumer Protection
202-326-3224
(FTC File No. X110050)
(Payday Financial NR)
E-mail this News Release
If you send this link to someone else, the FTC will not collect any personal information about you or the recipient.
Related Items:
Federal Trade Commission, Plaintiff v. Payday Financial, LLC; Great Sky Finance, LLC; Western Sky Financial, LLC; Red Stone Financial, LLC; Management Systems, LLC; 24-7 Cash Direct, LLC; Red River Ventures, LLC; High Country Ventures, LLC; Financial Solutions, LLC; and Martin A. Webb, individually and as an officer of Payday Financial, LLC; Great Sky Finance, LLC; Western Sky Financial, LLC; Red Stone Financial, LLC; Management Systems, LLC; 24-7 Cash Direct, LLC; Red River Ventures, LLC; High Country Ventures, LLC, and Financial Solutions, LLC, Defendants. (United States District Court for the District of South Dakota)
Case No. 3:11-cv-03017-RAL
FTC File No. 112 3023
For Consumers:
Payday Loans Equal Very Costly Cash: Consumers Urged to Consider the Alternatives
Money Matters ??? Dealing with Debt
Our mission: To prevent business practices that are anticompetitive, deceptive, or unfair to consumers
About Us Contact Us Website Policies Privacy Policy
No FEAR Act USA.gov Recovery Act For FTC Staff

GET OUT of the debt management program!! Pay cashcall with a money order. You are being double screwed now!!

That's how my mom-in-law got screwed out of alot of money before she filed for bankruptcy, a debt management program. To the unregistered poster on 10/07, you need to shut that down asap and deal with CashCall directly via emails/letters. Do not use a phone to contact them or they'll just screw you even more.