This is a problem that needs to be corrected. In this case, the line of credit is negatively affecting your credit a multiple of times even though it is one line.
In other words, remove any liability the consumer may have for resoloving a debt? We live in the Information Age. All the information this individual is requesting is readily available with a few keystrokes.
First parties should still have the right to sue if they deem it necessary. I have no problem with this rule if it is directed to third party debt buyers.
I don't believe in abusive behavior (i.e. the behavior spelled out in the FDCPA), but what this individual is saying that she owes a debt that she is not paying. Instead, she wants to be the offensive party and paint the collector into a corner using a recording device. Instead of purchasing a recording device, wouldn't she just be better served by using that money to pay the debt collector for the debt she owes?
I have worked in collections for 13 years with mostly first parties. All of these institutions have complied with the FDCPA and seek to service their lost members to the best of their abilities.
Consumers are typically notified numerous times before the account is sent to a collection agency. It is in the best interests of the credit union to try and resolve the delinquency before it is sent to a collection agency due to the added cost.
Consumers need to be pro-active in everything they do. If an individual had the capability to take on a debt then they should have the capability to resolve the debt. Every credit union I know goes the extra mile to help their members achieve financial success.
Paying a debt in full will always improve a credit score unless the debt is over 7 years old. If that is the case, I'm sure you can make a request to the financial institution to not report the payment.
Aaron Racicot
1
The court location should be in the city where the account was opened.
View this comment in the discussion thread
Aaron Racicot
2
To my knowledge, the process servicers must deliver or make an extraordinary effort to deliver notification to those being sued.
View this comment in the discussion thread
Aaron Racicot
3
This is a problem that needs to be corrected. In this case, the line of credit is negatively affecting your credit a multiple of times even though it is one line.
View this comment in the discussion thread
Aaron Racicot
4
Are you suggesting the courts to be open on the weekends? Typically, the court schedule follows a normal business schedule.
View this comment in the discussion thread
Aaron Racicot
5
The law is fine as is.
View this comment in the discussion thread
Aaron Racicot
6
In other words, remove any liability the consumer may have for resoloving a debt? We live in the Information Age. All the information this individual is requesting is readily available with a few keystrokes.
View this comment in the discussion thread
Aaron Racicot
7
First parties should still have the right to sue if they deem it necessary. I have no problem with this rule if it is directed to third party debt buyers.
View this comment in the discussion thread
Aaron Racicot
8
State rules should apply.
View this comment in the discussion thread
Aaron Racicot
9
I don't believe in abusive behavior (i.e. the behavior spelled out in the FDCPA), but what this individual is saying that she owes a debt that she is not paying. Instead, she wants to be the offensive party and paint the collector into a corner using a recording device. Instead of purchasing a recording device, wouldn't she just be better served by using that money to pay the debt collector for the debt she owes?
View this comment in the discussion thread
Aaron Racicot
10
I have worked in collections for 13 years with mostly first parties. All of these institutions have complied with the FDCPA and seek to service their lost members to the best of their abilities.
View this comment in the discussion thread
Aaron Racicot
11
You can always check with the original creditor.
View this comment in the discussion thread
Aaron Racicot
12
Consumers are typically notified numerous times before the account is sent to a collection agency. It is in the best interests of the credit union to try and resolve the delinquency before it is sent to a collection agency due to the added cost.
View this comment in the discussion thread
Aaron Racicot
13
I agree. I've heard of this happening and it's unjust.
View this comment in the discussion thread
Aaron Racicot
14
I think all states should have their statute of limitations moved to 7 years to coincide with the reporting rules.
View this comment in the discussion thread
Aaron Racicot
15
Consumers need to be pro-active in everything they do. If an individual had the capability to take on a debt then they should have the capability to resolve the debt. Every credit union I know goes the extra mile to help their members achieve financial success.
View this comment in the discussion thread
Aaron Racicot
16
Paying a debt in full will always improve a credit score unless the debt is over 7 years old. If that is the case, I'm sure you can make a request to the financial institution to not report the payment.
View this comment in the discussion thread