Recent lawsuit alleges that debt collector used Facebook to harass woman into paying debt
December 1, 2010 by Todd Murray · Leave a Comment
A Florida consumer, Melanie Beacham, has sued a debt collector for allegedly contacting one of her family members by using Facebook. The lawsuit alleges that Mark One Financial created a Facebook account using the pseudonym “Jeff Happenstance” and sent a message to Beacham’s cousin asking him to have Beacham call a number that leads to a Mark One collection representative. Beacham also maintains that Mark One used Facebook to contact her sister.
When reached for comment by the Huffington Post, a Mark One spokesman denied any knowledge of “Jeff Happenstance” and claimed that the company only uses Facebook when there is no other way to contact a debtor. In Beacham’s case, however, Mark One called her numerous times before resorting to Facebook, which indicates that Mark One already knew how to contact Beacham and resorted to Facebook to attempt to shame her into paying the debt.
The lawsuit, which seeks to restrain Mark One from using Facebook to contact debtors, appears to be the first one of its kind. But others are almost certain to follow as the economy continues a slow recovery and Facebook and other social media grow in popularity. And the use of social networks to contact debtors raises a number of interesting questions. For example, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act requires that every communication from a debt collector contain a notice that “this communication is from a debt collector.” Does a message through Facebook fall under the FDCPA definition of “communication” and therefore require the notice? I say yes, but the ultimate answer will be up to the courts.
If you live in Minnesota and have been harassed by a debt collector through Facebook or other social network sites, feel free to use the contact form in the upper right corner of this page to contact me for a free case evaluation.
Woman Sues Debt Collectors Over Alleged Facebook Harassment | Huffington Post | November 17, 2010
Photo: http://www.flickr.com/photos/fbouly/3568409530/sizes/l/in/photostream/
You can’t make this stuff up: debt collector allegedly set up fake courtroom to trick debtors into paying.
November 2, 2010 by Todd Murray · Leave a Comment
I’ve seen and heard about so many illegal tactics that debt collectors use to try to collect debts, that I’m rarely surprised any more. But I have to admit that this one did shock me a little.
The Pennsylvania Attorney General recently sued a debt collector, Unicredit, for setting up a phony courtroom, complete with a raised bench and a “judge” in an effort to trick debtors into making payments. The suit also alleges that Unicredit used fake police officers to deliver court summonses to debtors and implied that failure to comply would lead to arrest. At the “hearings”, debtors were often pressured into giving their bank account information, as well as information about other assets.
“This is an unconscionable attempt to use fake court proceedings to deceive, mislead or frighten consumers into making payments or surrendering valuables to Unicredit without following lawful procedures for debt collection,” Attorney General Tom Corbett said in a statement.
Debt Collection Firm Accused Of Setting Up Phony Courtroom | Consumerist | October 29, 2010
Can a debt collector call me at work?
March 17, 2010 by Todd Murray · Leave a Comment
Under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), a debt collector can’t call you at work if they know or should know that your employer prohibits you from receiving calls at work. The issues under this section are whether your employer prohibits personal calls at work and whether the collector knows about those provisions. Generally, if you tell the collector that you can’t take calls at work, that is enough to put them on notice. And some jobs–such as manufacturing, health care, and teaching–so obviously do not permit the employee to take personal calls at work that a debt collector should know that calls are prohibited without being told.
Other parts of the FDCPA, while not specifically related to collection calls at work, may also protect your job. For example, a debt collector can’t call you at inconvenient times or places. For many people, this includes their workplace. And you always have the right under the FDCPA to tell the debt collector to cease all contact with you, whether at your job or otherwise. It’s also important to note that a debt collector can’t call your co-workers or boss about your debt, except for location information in some situations.
If you live in Minnesota and want to stop the harassing debt collection calls at work, feel free to contact me for a free case evaluation.
If you’re dealing with debt collectors, make sure to download and use my free debt collection call log so that you can document all of the debt collectors’ communications. And if the debt collector does anything that you think was unfair; untrue; or harassing, oppressive, or abusive, please contact me to discuss the situation further. I offer a free case review for all FDCPA cases and if I agree to handle your case, you won’t have to pay me any money up front. My fees come from the money I recover from you if you win your case or accept a negotiated settlement.
(phote: Apreche)
How to request validation of a debt
March 11, 2010 by Todd Murray · Leave a Comment
The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) gives consumers the right to request validation of a debt. Under the FDCPA, a debt collector must send you a written notice within 5 days of their first communication with you. The notice must tell you, among other things, about your right to request validation of the debt.
In my experience, consumers should almost always request validation of the debt, particularly if a debt buyer is involved, because the more information you have, the better. But here are a couple things to keep in mind about the validation process:
- You must request validation in writing and you must request it within 30 days of your receipt of the required notice. Under the FDCPA, a debt collector doesn’t have to honor a request for validation unless it’s in writing and unless they receive it within 30 days of your receipt of the notice. As a practical matter, many debt collectors will honor a verbal request for validation and some will even honor a request made after the 30 days. But if you want to protect your right to have your debt validated, you must do it in writing and within 30 days. I recommend sending the letter via certified mail so that you can prove that they received it and when they received it.
- Once you’ve properly requested validation, the debt collector must cease all collection attempts until they provide it to you. There are some websites that claim that a debt collector must validate a debt within 30 days and if they don’t the debt is forgiven. This is simply not true. There is no time limit to how long the debt collector has to validate your debt. They just can’t call you, write you, sue you, or take any other action until they validate. If they do, they’ve violated the FDCPA.
- A debt collector can’t use your failure to request validation of a debt against you. The FDCPA prevents collectors from using your failure to request validation as evidence that you owe the debt.
- There aren’t any clear requirements about what type of documents are sufficient validation. The FDCPA doesn’t define validation, and the FTC has said that validation only needs to confirm that the debt collector is pursuing the right person and the right amount.
- Collection activity during the 30 day validation period can’t “overshadow” your right to request validation. This can be a little tricky, but here’s an example: let’s say you receive the validation notice on March 1 and then they serve you with a lawsuit on March 5. Under the FDCPA, you have 30 days–or until March 31–to request validation. And in Minnesota you have 20 days–or until March 26–to respond to a lawsuit. So because you have to answer the lawsuit before your time to request validation is up, the lawsuit “overshadows” your right to request validation. This is a violation of the FDCPA.
Feel free to downloand my free validation letter form and instructions. And if you live in Minnesota and believe that a debt collector has violated your rights under the FDCPA, feel free to contact me for a free case evaluation.
Texas man fights back against debt collectors
February 2, 2010 by Todd Murray · Leave a Comment
Craig Cunningham grew tired of repeated debt collection calls. So he decided to fight back by suing the debt collectors for violating the FDCPA and Texas state laws. In fact, Cunningham has filed 18 lawsuits and won over $20,000 from debt collectors. The story details a number of the tactics Cunningham has developed to bait collectors into violating the law. According to the story, he’s created quite a stir among the collection industry. In response to Cunningham and others like him, a new business opportunity has sprung up–one dedicated to helping collection agencies identify and avoid repeat FDCPA litigants.
I have mixed feelings about this story. On the one hand, I have a hard time mustering any sympathy for the debt collection industry–an industry that receives more consumer complaints than any other. But the FDCPA, and state laws like it, are designed to protect people against debt collection harassment and abuse. They’re not designed to be used to game the system to avoid paying debts. I’m also concerned that the debt collection industry will point to Cunningham and other aggressive debtors in their fight against stronger consumer regulations.
Dallas Observer | Better Off Deadbeat: Craig Cunningham Has a Simple Solution for Getting Bill Collectors Off His Back. He Sues Them | January 20, 2010 (via Consumerist)
Find out now if I can help you:
