Request forbidding any debt outside statutes be bought or sold. Further that the SOL be interpreted in the narrowest venue if multiple states are involved.
When debt is bought/sold, the initial FDCPA miranda warning is then required. The collector is asserting in the miranda that to his best knowledge the debt is legally enforceable.
When the debts are outside statutes, the collector cannot make that claim; therefore his assertion in the miranda is false and misleading.
Is it possible for the CFPB be given proxy, POA, or other authority in individual cases, or groups of cases, to pursue debt collectors for violations of the FDCPA?
The enforcement mechanism of the FDCPA is laughable from the point of view of the debtor.
For example, a debt collector said that since they are out of the country they are not required to adhere to the FDCPA. Luckily, I knew better, but most folk don't.
The CFPB's voluntary reporting combined with proxy enforcement power may curb the industry's activities, and may be cheaper and faster than class action lawsuits.
Apologies, unknown how to use 'reply' with moderator.
When we did it, it was agreed that any 3rd party communication outside SOL at any point was a potential violation of the FDCPA. Since 3rd party debt collectors are required to be truthful at all times, they cannot say 'we are attempting to collect a debt' if they are time-barred from collecting the debt.
We were the meanest, nastiest, most aggressive in the multi-state area at that time, and this was the stance.
Suggestion is clarify that time-barred debts are time-barred for the 3rd party as well, and cannot be collected, attempted to be collected, or bought/sold.
Thanks for doing this important work.
J. Lowe
1
Request forbidding any debt outside statutes be bought or sold. Further that the SOL be interpreted in the narrowest venue if multiple states are involved. When debt is bought/sold, the initial FDCPA miranda warning is then required. The collector is asserting in the miranda that to his best knowledge the debt is legally enforceable. When the debts are outside statutes, the collector cannot make that claim; therefore his assertion in the miranda is false and misleading.
View this comment in the discussion thread
J. Lowe
2
Is it possible for the CFPB be given proxy, POA, or other authority in individual cases, or groups of cases, to pursue debt collectors for violations of the FDCPA? The enforcement mechanism of the FDCPA is laughable from the point of view of the debtor. For example, a debt collector said that since they are out of the country they are not required to adhere to the FDCPA. Luckily, I knew better, but most folk don't. The CFPB's voluntary reporting combined with proxy enforcement power may curb the industry's activities, and may be cheaper and faster than class action lawsuits.
View this comment in the discussion thread
J. Lowe
3
Apologies, unknown how to use 'reply' with moderator. When we did it, it was agreed that any 3rd party communication outside SOL at any point was a potential violation of the FDCPA. Since 3rd party debt collectors are required to be truthful at all times, they cannot say 'we are attempting to collect a debt' if they are time-barred from collecting the debt. We were the meanest, nastiest, most aggressive in the multi-state area at that time, and this was the stance. Suggestion is clarify that time-barred debts are time-barred for the 3rd party as well, and cannot be collected, attempted to be collected, or bought/sold. Thanks for doing this important work.
View this comment in the discussion thread