A notice should go out that the debt has been sold because it definitely informs the consumer in how they should go about negotiating repayment of the debt.
When the debt is sold, it is sold for significantly less than what is owed, and the lender gets to write it off, and the borrower takes a 7-year negative hit in their credit profile.
Sometimes when you are dealing with debt collectors, the "debt collector" is often a wholly-owned subsidiary of the "original" lender, which means they get a tax write-off; you get a hit in your credit; and they still try to collect on the entire amount.
If a debt is sold, then it should actually be sold to a third-party, and not a subsidiary of the original lender. And consumers should get full disclosure on who their debt has been "sold" to.
A separate "summary of rights" should be sent to, and made available, to consumers. We are woefully uninformed and misinformed about our rights as consumers; what avenues of negotiation we can pursue; or even who can assist us.
Furthermore, there should be some laws on the books on when collectors cannot collect e.g. if the original creditor has not made an attempt to collect the debt for an extended period of time, I should not get a collection notice 20 years after the fact.
Some people are concerned that collectors don't do much more than doublecheck that the amount in the validation notice is what the creditor says the consumer owes. THAT'S ALL THEY DO.
They never do anything of substance to actually push back on the creditor's claims. I've had actual documentation that disputes creditor's claims, and all collectors do is rely on the information given them to by creditors. The CFPB is no better. My experience with them was much the same as dealing with a collector. The CFPB did nothing to verify or investigate the creditor's claims; they simply took the creditor's claims as outright facts despite conflicting documentation.
There should be a federal rule prohibiting collectors from reporting information to a CRA during the 30-day window.
There are automated processes in place with many collectors where they will generate 4 collection letters at one time, including the one where they tell you that they have reported you to a CRA. And then they will mail all those to letters (all dated on the same day) to you at the same time.
And this is done without any debt verification whatsoever.
Some useful documents would be the last three collection notices ACTUALLY sent to the consumer. Too many collection agencies have claimed they sent me regular notices regarding the debt when I have not have any contact with them for 2 - 3 years. But they claim they have "records" that claim otherwise. Yet, there is no supporting documentation of such efforts. like say, copies of the notices.
If I ever tell a collector that I'm recording the conversation, the call ends rather abruptly or the calls just stop.
Yet, I'm expected to be recorded whenever they initiate the call. They expect me to have an expectation to be recorded when they want to attempt to collect a debt, but the minute I want to record them while I dispute a debt, that's out of bounds...
I should know if a debt is time-barred, so that I can make an informed decision regarding the debt in question. The information should be in the validation notice.
If the debt becomes time-barred after the validation notice is sent, I should be informed of the new status of the debt IMMEDIATELY!
If a make an offer to repay the creditor and it's refused, then the debt becomes time-barred, why should the creditor still be to sue?
If the creditor is offered a repayment plan, turns it down, then sues after an extended period of time, the consumer should not have to pay that debt. Period.
Gevian
1
A notice should go out that the debt has been sold because it definitely informs the consumer in how they should go about negotiating repayment of the debt. When the debt is sold, it is sold for significantly less than what is owed, and the lender gets to write it off, and the borrower takes a 7-year negative hit in their credit profile. Sometimes when you are dealing with debt collectors, the "debt collector" is often a wholly-owned subsidiary of the "original" lender, which means they get a tax write-off; you get a hit in your credit; and they still try to collect on the entire amount. If a debt is sold, then it should actually be sold to a third-party, and not a subsidiary of the original lender. And consumers should get full disclosure on who their debt has been "sold" to.
View this comment in the discussion thread
Gevian
2
A separate "summary of rights" should be sent to, and made available, to consumers. We are woefully uninformed and misinformed about our rights as consumers; what avenues of negotiation we can pursue; or even who can assist us. Furthermore, there should be some laws on the books on when collectors cannot collect e.g. if the original creditor has not made an attempt to collect the debt for an extended period of time, I should not get a collection notice 20 years after the fact.
View this comment in the discussion thread
Gevian
3
Some people are concerned that collectors don't do much more than doublecheck that the amount in the validation notice is what the creditor says the consumer owes. THAT'S ALL THEY DO. They never do anything of substance to actually push back on the creditor's claims. I've had actual documentation that disputes creditor's claims, and all collectors do is rely on the information given them to by creditors. The CFPB is no better. My experience with them was much the same as dealing with a collector. The CFPB did nothing to verify or investigate the creditor's claims; they simply took the creditor's claims as outright facts despite conflicting documentation.
View this comment in the discussion thread
Gevian
4
There should be a federal rule prohibiting collectors from reporting information to a CRA during the 30-day window. There are automated processes in place with many collectors where they will generate 4 collection letters at one time, including the one where they tell you that they have reported you to a CRA. And then they will mail all those to letters (all dated on the same day) to you at the same time. And this is done without any debt verification whatsoever.
View this comment in the discussion thread
Gevian
5
Some useful documents would be the last three collection notices ACTUALLY sent to the consumer. Too many collection agencies have claimed they sent me regular notices regarding the debt when I have not have any contact with them for 2 - 3 years. But they claim they have "records" that claim otherwise. Yet, there is no supporting documentation of such efforts. like say, copies of the notices.
View this comment in the discussion thread
Gevian
6
If I ever tell a collector that I'm recording the conversation, the call ends rather abruptly or the calls just stop. Yet, I'm expected to be recorded whenever they initiate the call. They expect me to have an expectation to be recorded when they want to attempt to collect a debt, but the minute I want to record them while I dispute a debt, that's out of bounds...
View this comment in the discussion thread
Gevian
7
I should know if a debt is time-barred, so that I can make an informed decision regarding the debt in question. The information should be in the validation notice. If the debt becomes time-barred after the validation notice is sent, I should be informed of the new status of the debt IMMEDIATELY!
View this comment in the discussion thread
Gevian
8
If a make an offer to repay the creditor and it's refused, then the debt becomes time-barred, why should the creditor still be to sue? If the creditor is offered a repayment plan, turns it down, then sues after an extended period of time, the consumer should not have to pay that debt. Period.
View this comment in the discussion thread