Debt collectors are very knowledgable in what they do. We are professionals. But debtors are not stupid and should be expected to do their own research and educate themselves to participate in their defense. Why should a creditor have to explain to a debtor how to avoid paying their debt. By the time it's reached litigation, those conversations should have already occured and the debtor should be ready to offer his defense without being "taught" by the person to whom he owes money.
As a creditor collecting my own debt, I assert that by the time I move to litgation, I've exhausted all other forms of collection. I've talked to, emailed, and snail mailed the debtor. I've tried to negotiate a payment plan or settlement offer all to no avail. Litigation is our last attempt. Once we are litigation, we present our best case and let the debtor present their defense. My experience is that debtors don't participate in their defense out of either fear or lack of knowledge about the legal process. But the burden of educating the debtor shouldn't be put on the creditor's shoulders. If debtor's prefer to ignore the issue, then a default judgment is justified. There should be consequences to the inaction of the debtor.
My company calls, auto-dials, emails, and snail mails customers many times before they are sent to a collection agency. Many debtors simply refuse to respond to the original debtor. They only make payment after the account is assigned to a collection agency -- akin to seeing just how far they can go before there's a consequence to not making payment. Requiring a validation notice from the owner of the debt should be optional on the creditor's part. The FDCPA requires the collection agency to send their first notice after the debt is assigned. More notices from the creditor are useless and expensive. And the single most frequently used excuse of any debtor is "I didn't receive the letter/invoice/statement".
A first class letter costs $0.55 minimum (inclusive of postage, paper, and envelope). That cost does not include overhead and employee cost. Multiply that cost by the number of notices and statements already sent (and ignored) and you begin to see the true cost of collection.
Response to US Marine: while this isn't the best forum for me to go into my company's entire collection process, we work a debt for at least 120 days with letters, live agent calls, robo calls, emails, mailed invoices, and by suspending subscription service (where allowed) as part of our collection campaign. Even then, we only go to litigation after the debtor has been unresponsive to our attempts to contact them. I've found that if a debtor talks to their creditors, many times creditors will take their situation into account. I've offered lengthy repayment plans, reduced or waived interest or late fees, or partial settlement for those explain their hardship. But if a debtor is uncooperative or doesn't respond to our attempts to work out a balance, what other alternatives do creditors have?
The most common consumer contact my firm receives as a dispute is the comment by the consumer on a call with the agency that "it's not my debt". While that may be a true statement in some cases, some proof from the consumer should be required as to why the debt isn't theirs. For our customers, proof of residence at a different address from where our service was provided is usually sufficient for us to remove that customer from the debt.
The consumers must understand that they have to work with the creditor or agency to correct whatever info lead to an "incorrect link" (common name, bad SSN, fraud...). The 3 items listed in CFPB summary is usually adequate.
When two parties engage in a lawsuit, each side presents the evidence they have supporting their assertions. As a collector, I provide proof of the debt - invoices, letters to the customer or other communication with them to resolve the problem, signed applications, etc. The debtor is also expected to present some proof that the debt is not theirs. Yes, the assumption is innocent until proven guilty but you have to provide evidence to support your claim of innocence. If I offer a signed document that says you agreed to the purchase and documentation that supports that you did not pay, I have fulfilled my side of the burden of proof. The debtor also bears a burden of proof in our system. That's what the judge is for - to hear both sides, weigh the evidence, and make a fair decision based on the evidence and arguments presented.
Aturk
1
Debt collectors are very knowledgable in what they do. We are professionals. But debtors are not stupid and should be expected to do their own research and educate themselves to participate in their defense. Why should a creditor have to explain to a debtor how to avoid paying their debt. By the time it's reached litigation, those conversations should have already occured and the debtor should be ready to offer his defense without being "taught" by the person to whom he owes money.
View this comment in the discussion thread
Aturk
2
As a creditor collecting my own debt, I assert that by the time I move to litgation, I've exhausted all other forms of collection. I've talked to, emailed, and snail mailed the debtor. I've tried to negotiate a payment plan or settlement offer all to no avail. Litigation is our last attempt. Once we are litigation, we present our best case and let the debtor present their defense. My experience is that debtors don't participate in their defense out of either fear or lack of knowledge about the legal process. But the burden of educating the debtor shouldn't be put on the creditor's shoulders. If debtor's prefer to ignore the issue, then a default judgment is justified. There should be consequences to the inaction of the debtor.
View this comment in the discussion thread
Aturk
3My company calls, auto-dials, emails, and snail mails customers many times before they are sent to a collection agency. Many debtors simply refuse to respond to the original debtor. They only make payment after the account is assigned to a collection agency -- akin to seeing just how far they can go before there's a consequence to not making payment. Requiring a validation notice from the owner of the debt should be optional on the creditor's part. The FDCPA requires the collection agency to send their first notice after the debt is assigned. More notices from the creditor are useless and expensive. And the single most frequently used excuse of any debtor is "I didn't receive the letter/invoice/statement". A first class letter costs $0.55 minimum (inclusive of postage, paper, and envelope). That cost does not include overhead and employee cost. Multiply that cost by the number of notices and statements already sent (and ignored) and you begin to see the true cost of collection.
View this comment in the discussion thread
Aturk
4
Response to US Marine: while this isn't the best forum for me to go into my company's entire collection process, we work a debt for at least 120 days with letters, live agent calls, robo calls, emails, mailed invoices, and by suspending subscription service (where allowed) as part of our collection campaign. Even then, we only go to litigation after the debtor has been unresponsive to our attempts to contact them. I've found that if a debtor talks to their creditors, many times creditors will take their situation into account. I've offered lengthy repayment plans, reduced or waived interest or late fees, or partial settlement for those explain their hardship. But if a debtor is uncooperative or doesn't respond to our attempts to work out a balance, what other alternatives do creditors have?
View this comment in the discussion thread
Aturk
5
The most common consumer contact my firm receives as a dispute is the comment by the consumer on a call with the agency that "it's not my debt". While that may be a true statement in some cases, some proof from the consumer should be required as to why the debt isn't theirs. For our customers, proof of residence at a different address from where our service was provided is usually sufficient for us to remove that customer from the debt. The consumers must understand that they have to work with the creditor or agency to correct whatever info lead to an "incorrect link" (common name, bad SSN, fraud...). The 3 items listed in CFPB summary is usually adequate.
View this comment in the discussion thread
Aturk
6
When two parties engage in a lawsuit, each side presents the evidence they have supporting their assertions. As a collector, I provide proof of the debt - invoices, letters to the customer or other communication with them to resolve the problem, signed applications, etc. The debtor is also expected to present some proof that the debt is not theirs. Yes, the assumption is innocent until proven guilty but you have to provide evidence to support your claim of innocence. If I offer a signed document that says you agreed to the purchase and documentation that supports that you did not pay, I have fulfilled my side of the burden of proof. The debtor also bears a burden of proof in our system. That's what the judge is for - to hear both sides, weigh the evidence, and make a fair decision based on the evidence and arguments presented.
View this comment in the discussion thread