I believe email and texting would improve communications between both. In my experience consumers today use both more than land line phones. There will be arguments of potential abuse but creating more effective communication is a plus to both sides. In a sampling last year, I used 100 accounts to track and found that only five consumers responded to the initial notice and three of them questioned the balance and/or creditor named. Once telephonic communication began 10 accounts made repayment arrangements. This left 85 accounts or 85% "no result". However, the advice to contact via email on the company web site included in the second notice found 17% contacted via email. While the sampling is very small, it suggested that consumers use email versus verbal contact. I have seen different arguments that suggest a consumer must provide written authorization to be contacted via cell or email but possibly the option to contact via email rather than by phone may help improve communication and possibly reduce lawsuits against the consumer. Clarification is important for each but when one thinks that no contact by the consumer can and usually means another option by the creditor to file a lawsuit is increased, so the reality of today is how consumers communicate and the answer is using cell and emails.
Look, its 2013! Ignoring phone calls is annoying and constantly seeing missed calls is aggrivating. Why are bill collectors stuck in ancient times? Text me!! Email me!! Those phone calls are not going to be answered because I work and have kids. Communicati g with them would be so much easier if I could text and email these people. Seriously this is not 1950 we live in!!
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.
I generally prefer e-mail to telephone communication, but you can't be sure the e-mail has reached the person. I would suggest a notice that says, "If you don't acknowledge receipt of this e-mail, we'll start phoning you."
RBell
1
I believe email and texting would improve communications between both. In my experience consumers today use both more than land line phones. There will be arguments of potential abuse but creating more effective communication is a plus to both sides. In a sampling last year, I used 100 accounts to track and found that only five consumers responded to the initial notice and three of them questioned the balance and/or creditor named. Once telephonic communication began 10 accounts made repayment arrangements. This left 85 accounts or 85% "no result". However, the advice to contact via email on the company web site included in the second notice found 17% contacted via email. While the sampling is very small, it suggested that consumers use email versus verbal contact. I have seen different arguments that suggest a consumer must provide written authorization to be contacted via cell or email but possibly the option to contact via email rather than by phone may help improve communication and possibly reduce lawsuits against the consumer. Clarification is important for each but when one thinks that no contact by the consumer can and usually means another option by the creditor to file a lawsuit is increased, so the reality of today is how consumers communicate and the answer is using cell and emails.
View this comment in the discussion thread
kiko30
2
Look, its 2013! Ignoring phone calls is annoying and constantly seeing missed calls is aggrivating. Why are bill collectors stuck in ancient times? Text me!! Email me!! Those phone calls are not going to be answered because I work and have kids. Communicati g with them would be so much easier if I could text and email these people. Seriously this is not 1950 we live in!!
View this comment in the discussion thread
Aturk
3
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
Bonita Kale
4
I generally prefer e-mail to telephone communication, but you can't be sure the e-mail has reached the person. I would suggest a notice that says, "If you don't acknowledge receipt of this e-mail, we'll start phoning you."
View this comment in the discussion thread