The documentation sent to the defendant should include a link or instructions on how to proceed according to the rules of the course if the venue is incorrect.
In NYC courts, a lawyer representing a particular party (doesn't have to be collection related) will have a full day of cases lined up which leads me to believe at least some scheduling preference is given.
I am in the same situation as From_ill_annoy. I have been denied credit and loans as a result of these adverse actions which have impacted both my personal and professional life.
I believe that some collection agencies attempt to coerce payment in order to reset the clock on debts that would otherwise be time-barred.
The real issue here however is one of proper record keeping. The collection agencies may not be fully sure if the debt is time barred or not simply because it has passed hands several times. A transcript or log should be available to consumers upon request (at a minimum) showing when, where and who held the collection.
Partial payments should NOT revive the debt.
1 - The original lender or the agencies working on their behalf have more than reasonable time to collect on an outstanding amount owed.
2 - We have rules in place on both collecting debts and on reporting them and partial payment on a debt should not circumvent those rules.
I believe Amex handles this the best. The account holder is liable for all charges made by themselves and any authorized users added to the account.
Authorized Users however are given a unique card number and can be held accountable for any charges they make.
1 - Email: Yes so long as it is not a "blind" email attempt at reaching an individual as it may reach the incorrect party (first.lastname@company.com when it should be first.lastname1@company.com)
The down side to this is the inevitable fishing attacks by scammers. Email should therefore be limited to times when the consumer initiates it or formally lists their email with the 3 major reporting agencies as a method of initial contact.
2 - Texts: No, text messaging and cell phones should be prohibited as there is not a viable means for the consumer to record the text and bring it into court as documentation if needed.
All the issues raised about collectors calling the wrong individual or family members would be 100x worse with texting.
3 - Social Media: While the courts have made the rare exception for use of social media as a means of giving notice, not everyone is on every social media platform. I am very internet savy yet I am not on foursquare, pinterest and several others. On FB, Twitter and others there are several thousand people with my name who may get incorrectly notified.
Collection email should not be sent to a consumers work place email address. As I stated earlier, email communication should be consumer initiated at this time unless the consumer specifically opts to list an email address of record with the 3 major credit reporting agencies.
Email correspondences from a company or collection agency should list the state they are registered in and the registration number for consumer validation purposes. There is way to many scam emails to possibly think an email from a collector would be valid.
I think part of the issue has to do with balance forward billing systems where the payments are automatically applied to the account balance, not to an actual invoice.
Off the top, I believe NYC has similar laws where business are not allowed to charge extra for the use of credit cards however it seems online payments to the city (taxes, water bill, traffic ticket, etc) using a credit card are still assessed a processing fee. It seems NYC itself is confused about this.
In answer to the question:
1 - Collectors should be barred from stating that payment of a debt will definitively improve a consumers credit score as FICO (the industry standard) uses proprietary algorithm that the collection agent cannot possibly guess at.
2 - Yes, a collection agent, in good faith negotiation for resolution of the alleged debt should be able to remove the collection trade line from the consumers credit reports which should be stipulated in a binding settlement agreement signed by both parties.
As there can be a substantial monetary impact from incorrect entries on a credit report in the form of higher interest rates or being unable to secure a loan, - bonafide disputes should NOT be allowed on a credit report.
The credit reporting agencies buy and sell consumer data and should be obligated to list preferred communication methods times (if applicable) and language (if applicable) which the collection agency must abide by.
Collection agencies should abide by the rules and regulations surrounding HIPPA (medical), Customer Proprietary Network Information (FCC) and other statutes already in place. While the CRPB cannot change those statutes, agencies must still abide by it.
Collection Calls and Dunning notices (via letter or email) should include a unique Collection ID. This would be listed in credit reports for the purposes of tracking and consumers would be able to enter into a online database provided by the CRPB with the type of violation or issue.
This would also make it easier for the CRPB to look up disputes and determine if there's an actual issue.
There needs to be rules around how disputes are handled for people with the same or similar names. There needs to be a process for disputing incorrect information on a credit report as well as for handling mistaken identity with the courts.
I believe reasonable will depend on the circumstance of the dispute and the type of debt. A formal checklist should be created for various scenarios and the analyst reviewing the dispute should be able to enter comments against the checklist which would be part of the eoscar transcript.
Question: How often are accounts sold by original creditors to collection agencies with unresolved disputes? Specifically, if Company X billed $100 and I state it should be $75 based on reasonable means and Company X closes out the dispute in their systems because they disagree or give partial credit, should they be allowed to transfer the debt to a collection agency?
I believe all of the possibilities listed are necessary.
I never did business with Joe's Collection Agency and would never recognize any debt they allege is owed.
Interest and other fees would make the amounts unrecognizable either even in the event I could miraculously determine that $757.24 is an old utility bill.
Accounts turned over for outside collection should be required to have a unique Collection ID that can be tracked across credit reports and as debt is sold to other agencies.
JohnEllis
1
The documentation sent to the defendant should include a link or instructions on how to proceed according to the rules of the course if the venue is incorrect.
View this comment in the discussion thread
JohnEllis
2
In NYC courts, a lawyer representing a particular party (doesn't have to be collection related) will have a full day of cases lined up which leads me to believe at least some scheduling preference is given.
View this comment in the discussion thread
JohnEllis
3
I am in the same situation as From_ill_annoy. I have been denied credit and loans as a result of these adverse actions which have impacted both my personal and professional life.
View this comment in the discussion thread
JohnEllis
4
I believe that some collection agencies attempt to coerce payment in order to reset the clock on debts that would otherwise be time-barred. The real issue here however is one of proper record keeping. The collection agencies may not be fully sure if the debt is time barred or not simply because it has passed hands several times. A transcript or log should be available to consumers upon request (at a minimum) showing when, where and who held the collection.
View this comment in the discussion thread
JohnEllis
5
Partial payments should NOT revive the debt. 1 - The original lender or the agencies working on their behalf have more than reasonable time to collect on an outstanding amount owed. 2 - We have rules in place on both collecting debts and on reporting them and partial payment on a debt should not circumvent those rules.
View this comment in the discussion thread
JohnEllis
6
I received 13 robocalls/voicemails over the span of 2 months for an individual I never even heard of.
View this comment in the discussion thread
JohnEllis
7
I believe Amex handles this the best. The account holder is liable for all charges made by themselves and any authorized users added to the account. Authorized Users however are given a unique card number and can be held accountable for any charges they make.
View this comment in the discussion thread
JohnEllis
8
1 - Email: Yes so long as it is not a "blind" email attempt at reaching an individual as it may reach the incorrect party (first.lastname@company.com when it should be first.lastname1@company.com) The down side to this is the inevitable fishing attacks by scammers. Email should therefore be limited to times when the consumer initiates it or formally lists their email with the 3 major reporting agencies as a method of initial contact.
View this comment in the discussion thread
JohnEllis
9
2 - Texts: No, text messaging and cell phones should be prohibited as there is not a viable means for the consumer to record the text and bring it into court as documentation if needed. All the issues raised about collectors calling the wrong individual or family members would be 100x worse with texting.
View this comment in the discussion thread
JohnEllis
10
3 - Social Media: While the courts have made the rare exception for use of social media as a means of giving notice, not everyone is on every social media platform. I am very internet savy yet I am not on foursquare, pinterest and several others. On FB, Twitter and others there are several thousand people with my name who may get incorrectly notified.
View this comment in the discussion thread
JohnEllis
11
Texting should follow all rules regarding phone calls. Email should follow rules set in place regarding written, mailed, letters.
View this comment in the discussion thread
JohnEllis
12
Collection email should not be sent to a consumers work place email address. As I stated earlier, email communication should be consumer initiated at this time unless the consumer specifically opts to list an email address of record with the 3 major credit reporting agencies.
View this comment in the discussion thread
JohnEllis
13
Email correspondences from a company or collection agency should list the state they are registered in and the registration number for consumer validation purposes. There is way to many scam emails to possibly think an email from a collector would be valid.
View this comment in the discussion thread
JohnEllis
14
I have received robo-calls as earlier as 8am to a landline number for a debt not even mine. If they are not respecting times already, when will they?
View this comment in the discussion thread
JohnEllis
15
I think part of the issue has to do with balance forward billing systems where the payments are automatically applied to the account balance, not to an actual invoice.
View this comment in the discussion thread
JohnEllis
16
Off the top, I believe NYC has similar laws where business are not allowed to charge extra for the use of credit cards however it seems online payments to the city (taxes, water bill, traffic ticket, etc) using a credit card are still assessed a processing fee. It seems NYC itself is confused about this.
View this comment in the discussion thread
JohnEllis
17
In answer to the question: 1 - Collectors should be barred from stating that payment of a debt will definitively improve a consumers credit score as FICO (the industry standard) uses proprietary algorithm that the collection agent cannot possibly guess at. 2 - Yes, a collection agent, in good faith negotiation for resolution of the alleged debt should be able to remove the collection trade line from the consumers credit reports which should be stipulated in a binding settlement agreement signed by both parties.
View this comment in the discussion thread
JohnEllis
18
As there can be a substantial monetary impact from incorrect entries on a credit report in the form of higher interest rates or being unable to secure a loan, - bonafide disputes should NOT be allowed on a credit report.
View this comment in the discussion thread
JohnEllis
19
The credit reporting agencies buy and sell consumer data and should be obligated to list preferred communication methods times (if applicable) and language (if applicable) which the collection agency must abide by.
View this comment in the discussion thread
JohnEllis
20
The collection agency should be able to furnish all of the documentation listed in the proposal upon request.
View this comment in the discussion thread
JohnEllis
21
Collection agencies should abide by the rules and regulations surrounding HIPPA (medical), Customer Proprietary Network Information (FCC) and other statutes already in place. While the CRPB cannot change those statutes, agencies must still abide by it.
View this comment in the discussion thread
JohnEllis
22
Collection Calls and Dunning notices (via letter or email) should include a unique Collection ID. This would be listed in credit reports for the purposes of tracking and consumers would be able to enter into a online database provided by the CRPB with the type of violation or issue. This would also make it easier for the CRPB to look up disputes and determine if there's an actual issue.
View this comment in the discussion thread
JohnEllis
23
There needs to be rules around how disputes are handled for people with the same or similar names. There needs to be a process for disputing incorrect information on a credit report as well as for handling mistaken identity with the courts.
View this comment in the discussion thread
JohnEllis
24
I believe reasonable will depend on the circumstance of the dispute and the type of debt. A formal checklist should be created for various scenarios and the analyst reviewing the dispute should be able to enter comments against the checklist which would be part of the eoscar transcript.
View this comment in the discussion thread
JohnEllis
25
Question: How often are accounts sold by original creditors to collection agencies with unresolved disputes? Specifically, if Company X billed $100 and I state it should be $75 based on reasonable means and Company X closes out the dispute in their systems because they disagree or give partial credit, should they be allowed to transfer the debt to a collection agency?
View this comment in the discussion thread
JohnEllis
26
I believe all of the possibilities listed are necessary. I never did business with Joe's Collection Agency and would never recognize any debt they allege is owed. Interest and other fees would make the amounts unrecognizable either even in the event I could miraculously determine that $757.24 is an old utility bill.
View this comment in the discussion thread
JohnEllis
27
Accounts turned over for outside collection should be required to have a unique Collection ID that can be tracked across credit reports and as debt is sold to other agencies.
View this comment in the discussion thread