Consumer attorneys occasionally advise their clients not to record unlawful communications due to state laws requiring both parties' consent for recording. The CFPB should require that debt collectors subject to the FDCPA impliedly consent to recording by consumers.
There is currently dispute among federal district and circuit courts as to whether a post-default assignee of a debt comes within the creditor exception. The CFPB should issue a rule providing that a post-default assignee is a collector for FDCPA purposes.
The FDCPA contains an exception for creditors. The CFPB should include in any rule confirmation that the same practices prohibited for collectors under the FDCPA would be unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts and practices if done by a creditor.
The same debt will be recycled by changing the date and placing with various agencies. In some instances the debt has been paid, but the various collection agencies are still reporting the debt and trying to collect. This practice is not legal, but occurs frequently.
Debt collectors should not be permitted to harass a debtor's ex-spouse by repeatedly calling the ex-spouse. Debt collectors are known to use the old phone number of the debtor that now belongs to the ex-spouse exclusively. Even though the ex-spouse tells the collector to remove her phone number from the collector's records, the collector does not, and then repeatedly calls her trying to get to the debtor. Collectors must be required to remove her phone number from their records at her first request and not be permitted to call her again. Otherwise, she has no recourse to get the harassment to stop.
Debt collectors should not be allowed to alter their caller ID information. They call misrepresenting themselves as "Process Servers" inquiring information about another person's debt. This prevents the consumer from reporting the debt collector for violating consumer protection laws because a false identify was used.
As someone who regularly reviews credit reports, I am appalled by a practice I see regularly. Debt Collectors frequently resubmit the report of a debt as delinquent every month . This will have a highly adverse impact on the consumer's credit scores.
The debt collector should not give false information to Credit bureaus, like intentionally changing your address, especially when the person that owes the debt has already supplied the Credit Bureaus with the correct information.
As a bankruptcy lawyer, I frequently deal with clients or are harassed by debt collectors calling family or neighbors. the collectors will claim they are acquiring location information, but this is frequently the case where the consumer has been at the same location for years. I hope the rules will narrow the "location information" exception so that it can only be used where there is really doubt about the consumer's location.
Mslade, you have some valid points about the confusing Foti rulings, but I think you are wrong about the TCPA. This law has always applied to debt collectors, politicians, and even charities with respect to cellular phones. And it's not just one judge who has ruled in this way. The FCC and the courts have repeatedly affirmed it.
Are you suggesting collectors should be allowed to robocall cell phones of people who don't even owe the debt? What kind of backlash will there be against the collection industry when one of these misdirected robocalls contributes to a car accident or interrupts a senator during a meeting?
What a great idea -- record them. Reading these comments, there are so many examples of abuse, it seems like this Consumer Protection agency ought to have gotten the message thus far: the phones are used to harass. The only way to get this to stop is to put some teeth into the laws through civil fines, not put the onus on the consumer to have to sue.
The Consumer Finance Protection Bureau needs to have a large core of undercover agents that get jobs at collection agencies, credit agencies and servicers.
These agents need full federal law enforcement powers with guns and badges so they can perp-walk suspects out of their offices and take them to federal holding facilities for trial when they have proof of criminal activity.
Currently it seems many creditors, servicers and debt collectors consider themselves above the law. There's only two ways to discourage that thinking and that's jail time and/or fines.
After conviction, victims should receive a framed and signed (first name or nickname of the agent) photograph of the perp-walk. They usually don't get their money back but that's something they will treasure.
Although I don’t think that it is necessary for the CFPB to have undercover agents, I do think that the CFPB should create a new class of examiners. Currently the CFPB examiners only do examinations of the financial lenders and nonbank lenders. But since the CFPB is now taking on the collection industry, the CFPB should create a new classification of examiners to do onsite examinations of the debt collection companies. This would not create any harm to the CFPB nor would it impact the CFPB’s budget or operations. The CFPB’s budget is not allocated through congressional legislation – it is allocated through monetary transfers from the Federal Reserve. All the CFPB would need to do is ask for additional transfers from the Federal Reserve to create this new classification of examiners.
These new examiners would help the CFPB monitor the debt collection industry and would help stimulate the economy by adding more jobs. This is a win-win solution.
josephusmyer
1
Consumer attorneys occasionally advise their clients not to record unlawful communications due to state laws requiring both parties' consent for recording. The CFPB should require that debt collectors subject to the FDCPA impliedly consent to recording by consumers.
View this comment in the discussion thread
josephusmyer
2
There is currently dispute among federal district and circuit courts as to whether a post-default assignee of a debt comes within the creditor exception. The CFPB should issue a rule providing that a post-default assignee is a collector for FDCPA purposes.
View this comment in the discussion thread
josephusmyer
3
The FDCPA contains an exception for creditors. The CFPB should include in any rule confirmation that the same practices prohibited for collectors under the FDCPA would be unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts and practices if done by a creditor.
View this comment in the discussion thread
quino1974
4
Something must be done were criminal charges can be pursued if a collection agency continues to harass through phone calls and emails.
View this comment in the discussion thread
Jerry
5
The same debt will be recycled by changing the date and placing with various agencies. In some instances the debt has been paid, but the various collection agencies are still reporting the debt and trying to collect. This practice is not legal, but occurs frequently.
View this comment in the discussion thread
Babs
6
Debt collectors should not be permitted to harass a debtor's ex-spouse by repeatedly calling the ex-spouse. Debt collectors are known to use the old phone number of the debtor that now belongs to the ex-spouse exclusively. Even though the ex-spouse tells the collector to remove her phone number from the collector's records, the collector does not, and then repeatedly calls her trying to get to the debtor. Collectors must be required to remove her phone number from their records at her first request and not be permitted to call her again. Otherwise, she has no recourse to get the harassment to stop.
View this comment in the discussion thread
jcolesrn
7
Debt collectors should not be allowed to alter their caller ID information. They call misrepresenting themselves as "Process Servers" inquiring information about another person's debt. This prevents the consumer from reporting the debt collector for violating consumer protection laws because a false identify was used.
View this comment in the discussion thread
Daves
8
As someone who regularly reviews credit reports, I am appalled by a practice I see regularly. Debt Collectors frequently resubmit the report of a debt as delinquent every month . This will have a highly adverse impact on the consumer's credit scores.
View this comment in the discussion thread
Patpc101
9
The debt collector should not give false information to Credit bureaus, like intentionally changing your address, especially when the person that owes the debt has already supplied the Credit Bureaus with the correct information.
View this comment in the discussion thread
robertrossweed
10As a bankruptcy lawyer, I frequently deal with clients or are harassed by debt collectors calling family or neighbors. the collectors will claim they are acquiring location information, but this is frequently the case where the consumer has been at the same location for years. I hope the rules will narrow the "location information" exception so that it can only be used where there is really doubt about the consumer's location.
View this comment in the discussion thread
quino1974
11
I think charges should be pursued.
View this comment in the discussion thread
Randy Mayhew
12
Repeated phone calls are torture. There is NO need for this when there is a mail system. One completed phone call should be enough.
View this comment in the discussion thread
sw_in_the_midwest
13
Mslade, you have some valid points about the confusing Foti rulings, but I think you are wrong about the TCPA. This law has always applied to debt collectors, politicians, and even charities with respect to cellular phones. And it's not just one judge who has ruled in this way. The FCC and the courts have repeatedly affirmed it. Are you suggesting collectors should be allowed to robocall cell phones of people who don't even owe the debt? What kind of backlash will there be against the collection industry when one of these misdirected robocalls contributes to a car accident or interrupts a senator during a meeting?
View this comment in the discussion thread
gmt512
14
What a great idea -- record them. Reading these comments, there are so many examples of abuse, it seems like this Consumer Protection agency ought to have gotten the message thus far: the phones are used to harass. The only way to get this to stop is to put some teeth into the laws through civil fines, not put the onus on the consumer to have to sue.
View this comment in the discussion thread
Waywiser
15
The Consumer Finance Protection Bureau needs to have a large core of undercover agents that get jobs at collection agencies, credit agencies and servicers. These agents need full federal law enforcement powers with guns and badges so they can perp-walk suspects out of their offices and take them to federal holding facilities for trial when they have proof of criminal activity. Currently it seems many creditors, servicers and debt collectors consider themselves above the law. There's only two ways to discourage that thinking and that's jail time and/or fines. After conviction, victims should receive a framed and signed (first name or nickname of the agent) photograph of the perp-walk. They usually don't get their money back but that's something they will treasure.
View this comment in the discussion thread
stopwithspoofedcallerID
16
Although I don’t think that it is necessary for the CFPB to have undercover agents, I do think that the CFPB should create a new class of examiners. Currently the CFPB examiners only do examinations of the financial lenders and nonbank lenders. But since the CFPB is now taking on the collection industry, the CFPB should create a new classification of examiners to do onsite examinations of the debt collection companies. This would not create any harm to the CFPB nor would it impact the CFPB’s budget or operations. The CFPB’s budget is not allocated through congressional legislation – it is allocated through monetary transfers from the Federal Reserve. All the CFPB would need to do is ask for additional transfers from the Federal Reserve to create this new classification of examiners. These new examiners would help the CFPB monitor the debt collection industry and would help stimulate the economy by adding more jobs. This is a win-win solution.
View this comment in the discussion thread