Comments on: Do Bill Collectors Intentionally Mislead Consumers About Bankruptcy Options?

By: Jonathan

Jonathan — Mon, 23 Oct 2006 01:34:11 +0000

Scott makes a good point about being wary of web sites, blogs or message boards where people discuss possible violations of the FDCPA. While there is no doubt that some collection agents use improper or illegal tactics, by no means is every aggressive bill collector acting improperly.

Debtors who contribute to some of the "debt collection horror story" boards might be seeing violations that are not there. As such, if you think that you have been subject to a bill collector who has crossed the line, I would suggest that you do the following: 1. write down everything you can remember about the call 2. save every scrap of paper that you have received from the bill collector 3. go to an electronics store like Radio Shack and buy a cheap phone recorder (most State laws allow you to record yourself, but check to make sure) then try to capture the abusive collector on the phone 4. bring your evidence to a lawyer who handles FDCPA cases

By: Scott Riddle

Scott Riddle — Sat, 21 Oct 2006 12:47:21 +0000

While somewhat off-topic, a Circuit Court (6th, I think), recently (the last month or so) held that a collector who states that failure to pay "may" lead to referral of the debt to an attorney could be misleading and a violation of the FDCPA if the collector did not routinely refer such matters to an attorney. The standard is comparable to the "least sophisticated consumer." I won't argue with the necessity of consumer protections, but I don think we need to be wary of going too far in applying this standard. Collectors, if they choose to follow the law to the letter and be extra-cautious, are nearly limited to asking "please, will you pay this debt (for which we have provided all related paperwork)," and nothing more. What if standards like this are imposed on consumer bankruptcy lawyers with respect to the new BCPCPA provisions that require attorney certification, or the audits? Do the new required disclosure/information forms meet the standard of least sophisiticated debtor? I'd say no. Jonathan and I have had several discussions on reaffirmations and attorney certifications, and there is a very real concern for attorney liability to the debtor OR creditor if the reaffirmation is later determined, perhaps by a non-BR Court, to NOT have been in the debtor's best interest. I don't mean to compare bankruptcy lawyers with collectors, but we do have to keep diligent in how far courts go in interpreting all consumer protection laws (incl. some of the BAPCPA provisions).

Finally, people should be VERY wary of visiting some of the website referenced in the other comments. While there is a lot of good information out there, including blogs and message boards, one is just as likely to find gross misinformation or outright scams. I have browsed one of the boards mentioned in the past, and was amazed at what some people come up with.

By: Diane

Diane — Wed, 18 Oct 2006 15:25:03 +0000

One tiny correction, the FDCPA is the Fair Debt Collection PRACTICES Act

There are numerous accounts on several consumer forums of people being lied to by debt collectors regarding the dischargability of debts or just the availabilty of bankruptcy, under the new bankrutpcy law. They have become even more creative in the fairytales they tell debtors in order to extract money from them.

If you carve out some time to read thru many posts on the subjects of debt collection and bankruptcy, you can visit these forums, you'll find the lies told by collectors: http://www.creditboards.com http://www.creditinfocenter.com http://www.freeadvice.com

Debt collectors are ramping up their FDCPA violations, emboldened by their apparent perception, or maybe it's brainwashing, that consumers can't file for bankruptcy as 'easily' as they once could. I can speak for many consumers, bankruptcy, before and after the new law, is NEVER easy !!