Fighting Collections - They Are All Fraudulent!

I'm going to warn you right from the start that this is going to be a fairly long post. But I believe it will be an easy read and you will learn some very important information. Some of it may seem unbelievable but I assure you that it is true. Look, I've been doing this for over 31 years now. I can prove what I'm saying and I have proven it in court for quite a few of my lawsuit clients.  So grab your munchies and something to drink and let's start class!

It amazes me that people pay collection companies when they really don't owe the debt. Maybe they feel they have a moral obligation or they are stressed out and think paying them is the only way to make them go away. Maybe they've been convinced that they owe it and no one has taught them the truth about collections. Maybe it's a combination of the above, or all of the above, or some other reason that makes sense to them. Almost no reason makes sense to me.

Talking about collections with me makes me just go off, spewing out one fact after another and sometimes I get so riled up I get potty mouth. Yep, I do blow it occasionally when it comes to collections. Their fraudulent behavior and bullying, harassment, lies and stubbornness sometimes sets me off.  I'm going to teach you about collections today and I promise I will try my hardest to keep my words clean so as to not offend anyone or put bad language in front of youngsters that may read this.

Let's start from the beginning and we'll assume the original account is a credit card account, (but this scenario applies to most types of collection accounts including medical, utilities, insurance, cable/telecommunication accounts as well).

When you are approved for a credit card account, you are given plastic and a credit limit. When you spend using that card, the bank/card issuer convinces you that they lent you money/credit limit for you to spend. But that's not the truth. Banks are not allowed to lend money from their assets nor their depositors' assets.  It's also completely illegal to lend credit.  So now that you know that banks can't lend money or credit, what are they lending you?  The answer is NOTHING! 

What actually happens is that credit card agreement with your signature becomes a negotiable instrument. Your signature gives it energy and value. Title 12 instructs banks to treat negotiable instruments as cash. In accounting, a bank treats it as "cash equivalent" and that means that YOU FUNDED THE ACCOUNT!  The instrument has your signature on it. You own it. But they NEVER disclose that to you. You are actually making a loan to the bank but they trick you and convince you that they lent you something, totally ignoring that you were the one lending something.

Let's skip over to contract law for a moment. In order for a contract to be valid, there are 4 main elements, in addition to being bilateral - meaning 2 signatures, 1 from each party. The 4 essential elements are Offer, Acceptance (you have these two in your contracts), FULL DISCLOSURE, and EQUAL RISK. Your credit card account contract is missing the last 2 essential elements for a valid contract.

To have full disclosure, they would need to inform and advise and disclose to you that YOU are the one who is funding the account. They would have to disclose to you that the account is going to be insured in case of asset loss for the bank's favor and that you will be paying the insurance premium for that asset loss insurance (known as "credit default swap"), and get your written consent to the amount of the premium. They would need to disclose that they will most likely only service the account and transfer "ownership" to a special purpose vehicle such as an asset backed trust. They would need to disclose that this is securitization and that by separating the payment stream from the note, the contract is void. 

To have equal risk, both parties must have something to lose. What do the banks have to lose? They don't lend anything. They are insured against loss, they sell it and transfer it, they get tax credits. WHAT DO THEY HAVE TO LOSE? The only thing I can think of is insane amounts of illegal profits that they really aren't entitled to. But really that doesn't fit either because they insure everything! They can't lose!  Anyhow, I hope I've explained why the banks don't really have a valid contract.

Now, moving on to the creation of collection accounts and the fraudulent nature of them. 

You have your credit card account and you're using it and paying it regularly and consistently and then something happens that causes you to be late. You get hit with fees. You catch it up and use and pay and use and pay but you get to a point where you just can't keep up with the payments and you default on your agreement. The account gets further and further behind. So you try to work something out with them but still you can't keep up.

Let's say you asked me to try to talk to them about the account. So I call them up and say that I want to discuss account number  1234XXXX, and see what can be done to save the account and get back on track.  They ask me if I am Mary Doe and I tell them, no, I'm Shannon, Mary's friend, or sister, or whatever. They will then tell me that they cannot discuss the account with me or anyone except Mary unless she has given specific authorization or a Power of Attorney to speak with them on her behalf.  This is important to understand. They CANNOT share any information about Mary's account with me or ANY PERSON (corporations are also defined as a "person") without a request, agreement, authorization, or Power of Attorney specifically naming that person as authorized to communicate and receive her account information. THIS IS IMPORTANT!

Well Mary can't catch up the account and at 180 days, the bank needs to remove it from their books and they charge it off.  But wait! Remember that they insured that account in case of loss due to default or other credit/asset loss?  They never tell you this but at approximately 90 days, they are allowed to file an insurance claim for that asset loss. The insurance company then issues a check for the amount of loss they claim they will or have incurred. The account is now PAID OFF IN FULL.  Remember who paid the insurance premium?  That's right, it was you - whether you knew it or not you were charged the premium and you paid it. Or maybe I should say your negotiable instrument paid it. 

That insurance payoff happened at approximately 90 days of default. Remember I told you that the banks charge off the account at 180 days? That charged off amount is the balance they report to the credit bureaus, or an amount near the amount of the charged off amount. IT'S A HUGE LIE!  The account was paid off by insurance that YOU paid for. The balance is $0! They charged off NOTHING! Scam! Fraud! Lies! Schemers!  Your credit reports should ALWAYS show the charged off account has a $0 balance. Oh heck no! It shouldn't even be a charge off. You paid off that account in full at approximately 90 days of default. And that's not even taking into consideration that you funded the stinking account in the first place so you never really were in default and didn't even need insurance to pay it off. I swear! Now you know why I get so worked up. But oh, it doesn't end there.

When they do their charge off of the account, next they recoup some more money by filing a Profit and Loss on their taxes. This allows them to take a deduction or receive a credit for that asset loss.  Funny how they conveniently forget that they never lent a dime, never lost a dime, actually made money (from your payments and insurance payouts), and still benefit from the P&L. You'll see that P&L on your credit reports quite often under "Account Status." 

Now that they've squeezed out as much money for that account as possible for the time being, they use the credit reports to try to extort that fake balance out of you. Some people fall for it and you will see a Paid Charge Off on the credit reports. Many times people pay them because of the threat of being sued. Oh the greed of the banks!  

Banks don't always hold onto charged off accounts. Sometimes they crunch the numbers and figure that it's more beneficial to sell off the charged off accounts. This is where the 3rd party collection company enters the picture. They usually bundle up a lot of charged off accounts and sell them as debt portfolios.  Then "debt buyers" purchase them. I really hate the title of "Debt Buyers." They don't buy debt, they buy YOUR INFORMATION.

Now please recall the little scenario of me trying to talk to the bank on Mary's behalf. Do you remember why they wouldn't talk to me or anyone else about her account?  They, by law, cannot share any information with any person without Mary's consent. They can't share info or communicate or negotiate without her authorization or a Power of Attorney, or an agreement such as a company stepping in and paying off the account  for which she would have contracted to now pay them. An example of this would be similar or the same as a refinance.

When banks sell off their portfolios of charged off accounts to a 3rd party collection company or misnamed "debt buyer," they are selling the account information only, because remember, the account has not only been paid off by insurance, but also charged off and received tax credits. But, they NEVER contact the account holders and get their consent to share that information  with any other party. They do it behind your back! They do it without your consent and without your knowledge.

I declare that this is collusion between banks and collection companies to perpetrate identity theft on account holders.  Collection companies get these accounts, create new accounts that you know nothing about then send you a bill claiming you owe them. Wait!  Where's the contract? Contract law requires a valid bilateral agreement between you and another party. It requires offer and acceptance. When dealing with a collection company, there is No upfront offer and acceptance. There is no full disclosure - they ALL know that the true account balance is $0 and I've confirmed that with a broker for debt portfolios. They KNOW! Lastly, it's obvious that there is NO EQUAL  RISK! It is impossible to have a valid contract with these debt collectors. It is also highly likely that collection accounts are insured as well. I'd guess that I'm about 95% sure of it.

WHAT A HUGE SCAM ON CONSUMERS! GRRRR!  I know some of you are feeling what I feel when discussing this huge fraud on consumers. It's an outrage!  It's intentional and willful and corrupt.

I'm not advocating not paying your bills because it all starts off with a failure to disclose, no real lending, no truly valid contract, etc. I believe that in this society, you have to play the credit game in order to achieve the American dream of home ownership and purchasing cars, or personal loans, renting a place to live or renting a car, turning on utilities, getting insurance, getting a cell phone, or whatever. You need good credit to obtain additional credit or financing for major purchases. I'm just  wanting you to be aware and awake. I just want you to understand about collections and learn to fight back. I don't ever advise anyone to pay a collection account though. It's all a sham. 

Demand validation of these collectors. Demand they produce a valid contract. Demand they produce a signed authorization. They shouldn't be on your credit report for any reason but since they are, they certainly should not be there without an authorization to collect information and make communications about you and an alleged account. They can NEVER truly validate. There is no valid contract and there is no POA or signed authorization. They've never lent anything to you. They are not named on original contracts with original creditors so they don't even qualify to subrogate/substitute themselves on to a contract. They have no interest to protect. They haven't been aggrieved and are not entitled to seek redress. 

I hope you've learned a lot from this post. I hope it gets you fired up to fight back. I hope the information helps you to see success against these 3rd party collectors to get them off your credit reports and out of your lives! 

If you have collection accounts that you need off your credit reports and you don't want to take on the fight alone, contact me because I love my work. I love fighting to get these thugs off your reports and out of your lives. 

Disputing 3rd Party "Debts" After The 30 Day Requirement Has Passed

Many times consumers get letters in the mail from debt collectors saying that they have some debt with this company and they need to pay the bill. Some will claim they are offering this great one time settlement offer saving you 40% or 50% off the total if paid by some date.  Really?  Should you take them up on it when I can show you how to save 100% of that ridiculous bill?

The letter, which is called a Dunning letter, is required by law to have language in it that says you have the right to dispute this debt within the next 30 days.  But what if you decided to blow them off and throw away the letter? Do you lose your right to dispute it after the 30 days has passed? Let me explain how this law actually helps you.

Here's the thing about this law. Its FDCPA §609 or 1692(g).  This law says that they must inform the consumer of their right to dispute the alleged debt and if the consumer does dispute it during the 30 day period, then the collector must stop all collection activity. Now, it doesn't say that they can't furnish information on the credit report in the first 30 days, but if they do, your best chance of making this never go on or make it come off quickly from your credit report, is to dispute in the first 30 days.  This is because furnishing information on someone's credit report is considered collection activity.

But if you don't respond in that first 30 days, the law does not say that you can't ever dispute it.  I've had collectors tell my clients that they don't have to validate because it wasn't disputed within the first 30 days.  They are absolutely correct. But, these punks are spinning the truth. You see, there is nothing in the FDCPA that REQUIRES them to validate. Nope, not at all. BUT...what it does say, is that if a consumer does dispute, they MUST cease all collection activity until they validate - if they choose to.  If they choose not to validate, then, that's fine, it means they choose to delete it. Its one or the other.

The FDCPA also says that if a consumer disputes, they have to notify the credit bureaus that the account is disputed. Here's the fun part of that. The bureau employees are so uneducated in the FDCPA they don't get that they are going to help the collection agency violate the law. They put a comment on there that the account is in dispute. I really crack up at this.

The FDCPA just told them that they have to stop collection activity if the consumer disputes. So, the collection agency notifies the bureaus that its in dispute and a dispute comment goes on the report.  What does this mean? How is that a violation of the law?  Well, when they tell the bureaus the account is in dispute, they are not supposed to be instructing them to put a dispute comment on there, they are supposed to be deleting the account from the credit report.

What they have effectively now done is continue collection activity (because its still on the report) but now they are broadcasting to anyone who sees the report that they are breaking the law. Do you understand this? Its simple. They just need to delete  it!  

So, even if you have missed that 30 day period, your right to demand validation or dispute is not revoked. You can dispute at any time. Its just that they've been better trained at removing them from credit reports when they get a dispute during the first 30 days, than they are educated about how to handle disputes they get after the first 30 days. They obviously  are not taught well that any dispute at any time, means that for a 3rd party collector, it absolutely must be removed from the credit report until they fulfill validation.

I sure hope you understand this and use it to your benefit!  Dispute away, tell them to remove it until its been validated, and if they just put a "dispute" comment on there, well, if you sue them, you just earned an easy $1000 bucks!

Feel free to comment on this or email me with questions.  I'm here to help you successfully get rid of the ugly stuff on your credit reports and get it looking pretty again!

If you have found this blog helpful to you, please consider donating as a sign of your appreciation for information I have freely given to you.  The "Donate" button is on the right side bar.  Thank you for your generosity.

Collection Agencies Have NO Right To Inquire Or Furnish Information To Credit Bureaus!

It is my opinion, based on consumer protection laws, that collection agencies have no right at all to inquire on anyone's credit report nor furnish their bogus information on anyone's credit report.  It may be kind of a bold statement, but its the truth.

For today's topic, I'm going to show you why, based on real laws, they actually are not allowed to inquire or furnish information to credit bureaus.  There is one exception that I can think of, that is still sort of iffy, and I'll explain that as well. We are going to concentrate on mainly two laws, which you should be familiar with by now, the FDCPA and the FCRA.  I will also bring in my fav for 3rd party debt collector scumbags, good ol' 73 American Jurisprudence (AmJur) 2nd, Sect. 93.

I want to state that just because they don't have any legal right to be anywhere on someone's credit report, doesn't mean the law prohibits them from attempting to collect from consumers.  But, just because they can sleazily attempt to collect (and I mean that in the sweetest, kindest way), it never means anyone owes them squat.  Let's go over 73 AmJur 2nd, Sect. 93 first.

Oh, I just love this. It says, in case you haven't read it at least 5 times before on this blog, "The right of subrogation does not exist for a stranger to the transaction."  In normal everyday, non bar-attorney speak, it means there's no right to "substitute" (subrogate) yourself into or onto a contract (transaction), if you weren't originally and specifically named in the contract (a "stranger").  Do you understand what this is saying?  A 3rd party collector is NOT named on the original contract between the consumer and the "creditor", so they cannot claim that anyone owes them anything.

What if they bought an alleged debt from an original creditor and claim the purchase included all rights of interest and assignment?  Hmmm, does that mean that they are now owed something? Hah! Look at the previous paragraph again.  Its pretty clear.  It doesn't matter if they bought it, they were assigned it, they traded something of value (or not) for it, or however they acquired it and got their greedy corporate hands on it, if they were not on the original contract, no one is obligated to pay them a dime!  With NO VALID CONTRACT, they also can't validate, verify, nor may they place info on the credit reports.

Now, take a look at the FDCPA. This law is called the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. I personally see very little need for this law, except to reiterate how collectors should treat people and to let consumers know that debt collectors don't really have the rights they try to claim they have.  FDCPA Section 805(b) says: 

          COMMUNICATION WITH THIRD PARTIES. --Except as provided in Section 804, without the prior consent of the consumer given directly to the debt collector, or the express permission of a court of competent jurisdiction, or as reasonably necessary to effectuate a postjudgment judicial remedy, a debt collector may not communicate, in connection with the collection of any debt, with any person other than the consumer, his attorney, a consumer reporting agency if otherwise permitted by law, the creditor, the attorney of the creditor, or the attorney of the debt collector.

I underlined the last part where it says "if otherwise permitted by law". Why do they say "otherwise"?  Could it be that they know that they are trying to trick you by the way its worded, into believing that it is permitted by law? If you took out the part that is underlined, then it would be saying it is permitted by law.  Read it that way and see for yourself.  By adding that last little section of the statement what they are saying is, "its not permitted by law, but if you can find a law that permits a debt collector to communicate with a credit reporting agency in connection with the collection of a debt, then hey, we'll also allow it."  I'm telling you, and I ran this by my trusted and expert mentor (who happens to be a legal genius, Pr. Atty Gen. and super close friend) and a whole hosts of credit industry professionals, and they concurred.  The FDCPA is saying debt collectors are not allowed to furnish information regarding alleged debts on consumers' credit reports.

How about the FCRA?  The FTC has already concluded and published opinion letters from their legal staff that state reporting on credit reports is a communication.  Case law such as Heintz v. Jenkins came to that conclusion also.  FCRA Section 603 says:

     (o)  EXCLUDED COMMUNICATIONS. A communication is described in this subsection if it is a communication
(5) with respect to which
     (A) the consumer who is the subject of the communication
          (i) consents orally or in writing to the nature and scope of the communication, before the collection of any information for the purpose of making the communication;
          

The FCRA also doesn't allow 3rd party collectors to inquire on consumers' credit reports. Hopefully you've heard the term "Permissible Purpose."  I'm going to show you how this absolutely never gives collectors the right to inquire on credit reports. They never have "Permissible purpose."  FCRA Section. 604 says:

     § 604. Permissible purposes of consumer report
a) In general. Subject to subsection (c), any consumer reporting agency may furnish a consumer report under the following circumstances and no other:
    (3) To a person which it has reason to believe
    (F) [otherwise] has a legitimate business need for the information
         (i) in connection with a business transaction that is initiated by the consumer; or
        (ii) to review an account to determine whether the consumer continues to meet the terms of the account
*(I crossed out the word otherwise so it doesn't confuse you without reading the rest of that section)

Each of these laws says the same thing. Unless the consumer authorizes it prior to them taking action, it is illegal for them to inquire or furnish information. There is no doubt in my mind that what the law says is exactly what it means.  The sad thing is that credit bureaus fail to require compliance with the law, which means they also are violating the law, because they put profits before consumers' rights. They put money before obeying the law. Its a sad shape this industry is in when all of them don't sweat it or worry at all about breaking the law because they make so much dirty money, they can pay off whoever they need to, whether it is a consumer that wins a lawsuit against them or maybe the courts, judges, lawyers, CFPB, FTC, ...you get what impression I'm getting by their bad behavior.

Okay, I said I'd tell you the one exception that I still believe is sort of iffy. That would be when a consumer pays a 3rd party collector for an alleged debt that they probably wouldn't have paid had they known better.  Just because someone pays a collector does not mean that the collection agency will or has to remove it from the credit report. And, the act of paying them establishes a business relationship with them. The reason why I say its still "iffy", is because the transaction was NOT initiated by the consumer.  It was initiated by the collection company because in most cases, the payment was extorted by the collection company that guilted the consumer or harassed the consumer into paying them.  I'm somewhat jaded, to put it mildly, but that's my opinion on why most consumers who give any money to a collection company do so.

But look at the law again. Regardless of the business relationship established by the payment to the collection company, the law says that the business transaction has to be Initiated by the consumer. I reiterate that it is my opinion, that consumers do not go out looking to transact with 3rd party collectors and therefore, collectors have not met the conditions required by either the FDCPA nor the FCRA for inquiring or furnishing information on consumers' credit reports.

I hope you've enjoyed the information I've presented in this post and I hope if you are working on getting your credit report as accurate as possible and as derogatory free as possible, that it will help you reach your goals.  If you would like experienced expert assistance to help you manage your credit data, please contact me.  My contact info is up on the top right hand side of the page. I love helping people and believe that I can help you achieve the results you are looking for.

If you have found this blog helpful to you, please consider donating as a sign of your appreciation for information I have freely given to you.  The "Donate" button is on the right side bar.  Thank you for your generosity.

How To Deal With Collection Agencies ~ Part 4 (States With License and/or Bonding Requirements)

This is my final post in this series and I'm sorry that I'm so late in getting it out, especially for those of you who have been checking and waiting for it.  This post is about a very important tool to use against the collection agencies who are harassing you, badgering you, or simply just trying to take your money from you.  I cannot stress enough how important it is that you don't just go and pay these 3rd party collectors.  It will add years of negative credit to your credit reports and can be so much harder to get them to come off when they've been paid.

Now, we've covered a couple tools already. States that have their own version of the FDCPA, and my little bonus of UCC codes on that one. Then, the Statute of Limitations (SOL) for each state.  Here's a little bonus on the SOL that I recently discovered, and those of you in states that have ridiculously long SOL's are going to love this.  UCC 3-118(g) and UCC 4-111 state that the SOL is 3 years!

Yep, 3 years. UCC 3-118(g) is important for credit because this has to do with negotiable instruments and conversion of an instrument.  That's what they do with credit accounts, be it credit cards, credit lines, mortgages, "money lent" by financial institutions. They don't lend money, they lend credit, which is illegal, and they convert the loan docs, application, eg. promissory note or negotiable instrument, whatever you want to call it, into "money. 3 years, folks, 3 years!

Okay, lets get into this last tool.  Many of you are going to love it. This tool is a list of the states that require debt collectors to be licensed and/or bonded to conduct collection activity within their borders.  This usually goes for debt collection law firms as well.  They used to love that they could get away with their sleazy tactics because they were a law firm. But now, if debt collection is the main function of their law firm, they are lumped in the pile of cow poo that is the 3rd party collectors and junk debt buyers that try to collect from consumers.

Most states publish a list of all the licensed debt collection companies.  Some states allow collection acts if they are licensed in other states with similar licensing requirements.  Also, some states have cities that have license requirements as well, to protect the residents of their cities from these scum.  It is wonderful!  I've included the web addresses to look up the collection company or information how to get a list of the 3rd party collectors to see if the ones bugging you are licensed. Most of these state sites have links or instructions how to file complaints against them too.

I want to apologize to those of you who live in states that don't seem to care enough to enact legislation that requires these bullies to get licensed or bonded.  I know, its not me that should apologize, it's them, but you know they will never issue a sincere apology to you. I'm in that same boat as many of you. I'm in California and they don't require licensing or bonding for debt collectors here either.  Its sad. Personally, I think its because its such a money making business for the state to get the court fees from all of them and all the consumers who get sued and lose or have to pay a court filing fee to fight the collectors.  They probably make much more by allowing all that fraudulent nonsense than they would through licensing fees.

Well, read on!  Here's the list!

STATE and TERMS	WHERE TO FIND LIST
Alaska - Only requires license for companies located in Alaska or out of state collecting for original creditors located in Alaska.	http://commerce.alaska.gov/CBP/Main/SearchInfo.aspx
Arizona - Allows collection agencies that have a valid license in another state that has similar licensing requirements and has a reciprocity clause to collect without obtaining an AZ license	http://azdfi.gov/lists/CA_List.HTML
Arkansas - Requires a license whether they are located in the state or not, if attempting collection on a resident of Arkansas	http://www.asbca.org/collect_search/
Colorado - Requires all debt collectors to be licensed and to maintain an office in the state, open to the public, if they want to try and collect from residents.	http://www.coloradoattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/uploads/cab/CabReport.pdf They update the list every month I think, but I believe the link stays the same.
Connecticut - Have to have a license to collect, regardless of whether they are located in state or not.	http://www.ct.gov/dob/cwp/view.asp?a=2233&q=297872  There's a link at the bottom that is updated to view current licensees and also a tab on the left to verify a license.
Delaware - Must be licensed to collect in the state. They pay $75 to be licensed as Mercantile/collection agency but sometimes they license under personal or professional services as well.	https://dorweb.revenue.delaware.gov/bussrch/ This page has a search feature and the ability to download the list of licensed businesses.
Florida - Must be licensed if located in state. Must be licensed if out of state and collecting for creditor in state or soliciting accounts from creditors in state. Are not allowed to collect on medical bills for services covered under HMO's.	https://real.flofr.com/ConsumerServices/SearchLicensingRecords/Search.aspx
Hawaii - Must be licensed and bonded. However, for out of state collection companies, if they are licensed and bonded in another state, they can apply for an exemption. But, the exemption is not automatic. It must be approved and granted by the state.	http://pvl.ehawaii.gov/pvlsearch/app This link is to search for licenses. http://hawaii.gov/dcca/pvl/programs/collection/ This page has a link to file complaints against the collectors and look up their complaint history as well!
Idaho - Must be licensed whether in state or not to try to collect alleged debts from residents	http://finance.idaho.gov/CollectionAgency/CollectionAgencyLicense.aspx
Illinois - Must be licensed unless they are out of state and are licensed with equivalent requirements from that state	https://www.idfpr.com/licenselookup/licenselookup.asp
Illinois - City of Chicago Only - Must have a license in both Chicago and the state license. However, if they have an exemption with the state of Illinois, they can get one in Chicago too.	https://data.cityofchicago.org/Community-Economic-Development/Business-Licenses-Current-Active/uupf-x98q
Indiana - Must be licensed and bonded.	http://www.in.gov/apps/sos/securities/sos_securities
Iowa - Not required to be licensed but must register if they collect $25,000 or more in a calendar year. Applies to creditors and collectors	http://www.state.ia.us/government/ag/images/pdfs/Contacts_ICCC_Notification_Fe.pdf
Louisiana - Must be licensed and bonded	http://www.sos.la.gov/BusinessServices/SearchForLouisianaBusinessFilings/Pages/default.aspx
Maine - Must be licensed and bonded	http://pfr.informe.org/ALMSOnline/ALMSQuery/Welcome.aspx
Maryland - Must be licensed and bonded	http://www.dllr.state.md.us/finance/industry/licsearch.shtml  You can search by name or location.
Massachusetts - Must be licensed and they use a service called Nationwide Multistate Licensing System (NMLS)	http://www.nmlsconsumeraccess.org/  Looks like its for mortgage brokers but its actually for debt collectors too
Michigan - Must be licensed whether in state or not to try to collect alleged debts from residents	http://www.dleg.state.mi.us/verify.htm
Minnesota - Individual debt collector (human being) and the collection company they work for must be licensed.	http://mn.gov/commerce/banking-and-finance/consumers/license-lookup/license-lookup.jsp
Nebraska - Must be licensed and bonded	http://www.sos.ne.gov/licensing/collection/pdf/licensed-collection-agencies.pdf
Nevada - Must be licensed and bonded	https://fid.online.nv.gov/datamart/selSearchType.do?from=loginPage
New Jersey - Must be bonded whether in state or not to try to collect alleged debts from residents	http://www.nj.gov/treasury/revenue/collagency.shtml  You have to request a verification of the bond by mail.
New Mexico - Must be licensed and bonded whether in state or not to try to collect alleged debts from residents	http://rldverification.rld.state.nm.us/Verification/Search.aspx?facility=Y  In the "License Type" drop down list, select collection agency
New York - City of Buffalo Only - Must be licensed and bonded whether in state or not to try to collect alleged debts from residents	http://www.city-buffalo.com/Home/City_Departments/EDPIS/Licenses/LicensedContractors
New York - New York City Only - Must be licensed whether in state or not to try to collect alleged debts from residents and must include license number on all correspondence	http://www.nyc.gov/html/dca/html/licenses/license_check.shtml
North Carolina - Must be licensed and bonded whether in state or not to try to collect alleged debts from residents.	https://sbs-nc.naic.org/Lion-Web/jsp/sbsreports/CompanySearchLookup.jsp Use "company type" for drop down to collection agency http://www.ncdoi.com/ASD/ASD_Consumer.aspx  Use this link to file a complaint!
North Dakota - Must be licensed and bonded whether in state or not to try to collect alleged debts from residents. This includes every branch office they may use for collection activity	http://www.nd.gov/dfi/regulate/reg/regulated.asp
Oregon - Must be licensed and bonded whether in state or not to try to collect alleged debts from residents.	http://www4.cbs.state.or.us/ex/all/mylicsearch/index.cfm?fuseaction=main.show_main&group_id=20&profession_id=22&profession_sub_id=22000&profession_name=Collection%20Agencies
Rhode Island - Must be licensed whether in state or not to try to collect alleged debts from residents.  May also have to have a bond.	http://www.dbr.state.ri.us/documents/divisions/banking/program_operations/List_of_Debt_Collectors.pdf
Tennessee - Must be licensed and bonded. However, for out of state collection companies, if they are licensed and bonded in another state, they can apply for an exemption. But, the exemption is not automatic. It must be approved and granted by the state.	http://verify.tn.gov/
Texas - Must be bonded whether in state or not to try to collect alleged debts from residents	https://direct.sos.state.tx.us/debtcollectors/dcsearch.asp
Utah - Must be registered with the Div. of Corporations and Commercial code and bonded whether in state or not to try to collect alleged debts from residents	https://secure.utah.gov/bes/
Washington - Must be licensed and bonded whether in state or not to try to collect alleged debts from residents. Also includes debt buyers.	https://fortress.wa.gov/dol/dolprod/bpdLicenseQuery/
West Virginia - Must be licensed and bonded and have an office in state to perform collection activities	http://apps.sos.wv.gov/business/corporations/
Wisconsin - Must be licensed and bonded to collect in state. Out of state exemption if only performing collection activity via "interstate telecommunications and interstate mail."  ~ To me, this sounds like they can't sue you if they are out of the state and don't have a license or bond and they have an exemption.	http://www.wdfi.org/fi/lfs/licensee_lists/
Wyoming - Must be licensed and bonded and have an actual office with resident manager in the state. Every office or branch must be licensed and bonded. Exemptions for collecting business and or commercial debt or law firm collecting for the TRUE name of the original creditor.  Also, do not have to be licensed if the alleged debt they are attempting to collect originated out of state on the internet or by mail.	http://audit.state.wy.us/banking/cab/cablicensees.htm

Now, I hope you noticed that Illinois has a state licensing requirement but so does the city of Chicago. This means that if you live in Chicago, Illinois, the debt collector has to have a license for both the state and the city of Chicago.  I can honestly say, this is one thing that it appears Chicago is doing right!  If you get a bill from a debt collector, and you demand validation and they respond, you've got them.  Heck, you've got them if they aren't licensed. REPORT THEM IMMEDIATELY, at the same time you send them a "Ha, Ha, you're gonna get it" letter!

The state of New York DOES NOT have any licensing requirements. But the city of Buffalo does and New York City has licensing laws too!  Its not as good as Chicago, but heck, if you live in one of those two cities, you're faring better than the rest of the folks in the state of New York that live in other cities!

Make sure if you're in one of these states or cities that require licensing, registration or bonding, you look up that 3rd party collector. You never know, they may not be licensed, and that will make your credit repair efforts that much easier! Some states may have quirky little exemptions,  but for the most part, all of these states require some sort of licensing and/or bonding.

You should use this tool.  Also, I urge you to file complaints on these 3rd party collectors for every little violation that they do. You may have to do a little bit of searching on your state's correct government website to find how to file a complaint, but do it.  If they get repeated complaints from consumers, they will get fined and can get their licenses revoked. Getting these companies banned from collecting in your state helps all consumers. Then it may be a little easier to get bad debt removed from your credit reports because they will NOT be allowed to report on your credit reports in any way, shape or form because it is considered "collection activity" and without a license, it is blatantly illegal!

I like giving you assistance in your fight to rid your credit reports of these blood suckers and I hope that this information helps your pursuit of pretty credit a bit easier.  If cleaning up your credit is a bigger job than you want to handle on your own, please give me a call or email me.  I'd love to be the one you choose to help you.

How To Deal With Collection Agencies ~ Part 3 (State Statute Of Limitations For Credit Cards)

A lot of the bad credit that is on credit reports is from collection agencies.  But, there are original creditors too that report, so you may have 2 or more negative entries on your report for the same alleged debt.  This tool, the State Statute of Limitations (SOL) is great for both.  Now, most states have reasonable SOL's but there are a few that are absolutely insane!  When an alleged debt is outside of the SOL it is considered Time-Barred and non-collectible.  But, that doesn't stop many of these collection agencies, and some creditors, from still going after you.  What is completely ridiculous, is that they legally can!  Well, that is, unless you put a stop to them.

How do you put a stop to them, through a demand for validation and then a follow up with a Cease & Desist (C&D) letter.  Some are arrogant and greedy enough though to file a civil claim against you.  That can easily be defeated by taking their lame attempt at validation (usually some printout or a copy of the last bill from the original creditor) that clearly shows a date from years ago.   I have actually seen them dummy up a new statement with a current date on it, supposedly from the original creditor, to try to re-age and trick the alleged debtor into giving up and just paying them.

I'm going to shout now, and bang my head against a wall - DON'T DO IT!!! DON'T PAY THEM!!!

Dig around for a true old bill or contact the original creditor for a copy of the statement.  Ask them to send you back a copy of the last bill that you paid or better yet, check your credit report. Usually, the original creditor will put a somewhat accurate date on the credit report, and Equifax has a little chart that shows when you did and didn't make payments.  That is proof of the Date of Last Activity (DLA), which is when the SOL starts tolling.  If you're sued, then that will be one of your exhibits in your answer to the complaint, proving that it is time barred and they have no recourse.  Don't forget, you want to keep copies of your letters demanding validation and their responses.  It is just more proof that they didn't validate, so they are in violation of the FDCPA (continuing collection activity without validating or verifying the alleged debt).

So, let's get to it. Here are the Statute of Limitations for Open Accounts, which represent credit card accounts, which are the main type of negative credit that annoys most of us, for every US state and several territories. 

STATE	NUMBER OF YEARS	ANY COMMENTS
Alabama	3 Yrs	Actions based on fraud - 2 yrs
Alaska	3 Yrs	Used to be 6 yrs
Arizona	6 Yrs  or  4 years On July 20, 2011 AZ changed its statutes to include credit cards as written contracts. If the default/DLA is prior to 7/20/11 then the prior 3 year statute of limitations (SOL) applies. If the DLA is after 7/20/11 then the new SOL applies.  Now, the new 4 year SOL is for credit card accounts obtained outside the state of AZ and the 6 year SOL applies to credit cards obtained in the state of AZ.  So check the billing address of your credit card account to see whether your credit card is inside or outside of AZ.	Judgments have to be renewed w/in 5 yrs. Pymt w/o acknowledgment doesn't restart the SOL
Arkansas	3 Yrs	Medical 2yrs from service or last payment, whichever is latest
California	4 Yrs	SOL stopped if pymt made after SOL expires - In other words, Do Not Make Pymt after it expires! But, pymt w/o acknowledgment does not restart the SOL
Colorado	3 Yrs	Jdgmt can renew every 6 yrs
Connecticut	6 Yrs	Open is considered written
Delaware	3 Yrs	Considered a general contract
District of Columbia	3 Yrs	Oral promise restarts SOL!!
Florida	4-5 Yrs	Contract or Written instrument is 5 yrs but all other is 4 yrs. Pymt w/o acknowledgment doesn't restart the SOL
Georgia	4 Yrs	From date of default, not last pymt. Making a pymt without acknowledging the alleged debt does not restart the SOL.
Guam	6 Yrs	For contracts such as medical bills, the SOL is 4 yrs from date of service
Hawaii	6 Yrs	Jdgmt can renew 10 yrs
Idaho	4 Yrs	Jdgmt can renew 5 yrs
Illinois	5 Yrs	Pymt or promise to pay extends it to 10 yrs from that date
Indiana	6 Yrs	Pymt, acknowledgment or a promise to pay restarts the SOL
Iowa	5 Yrs	Pymt, acknowledgment or promise to pay restarts SOL
Kansas	3 Yrs	Written contracts SOL is 5 years. Many sources claim SOL for credit cards is 5 yrs but that is not so according to Article 5, 60-512 of Kansas statutes.  Pymt w/o acknowledgment doesn't restart the SOL
Kentucky	5 Yrs	Judgment 15 yrs
Louisiana	3 Yrs	Jdgmt can renew 10 yrs
Maine	6 Yrs	Jdgmt is 20 yrs (don't let that happen to you! Pymt w/o acknowledgment doesn't restart the SOL
Maryland	3 Yrs	Reaffirming through written, orally or a pymt restarts SOL
Massachusetts	6 Yrs	Judgment 20 years, probate claims 1 yr from date of death. Pymt w/o acknowledgment doesn't restart the SOL
Michigan	6 Yrs	Jdgmt can renew 10 yrs. Pymt w/o acknowledgment doesn't restart the SOL
Minnesota	6 Yrs	Pymt or written acknowledgement restarts the SOL
Mississippi	3 Yrs	Jdgmt can renew 7 yrs. Pymt w/o acknowledgment doesn't restart the SOL
Missouri	5 Yrs	Jdgmt can renew 10 yrs. Pymt w/o acknowledgment doesn't restart the SOL
Montana	8 Yrs	Written acknowledgment or pymt restarts SOL
Nebraska	4 Yrs	Pymt, partial pymt, or written acknowledgment restarts SOL
Nevada	4 Yrs	Pymt w/o acknowledgment of alleged debt doesn't restart SOL
New Hampshire	3 Yrs	Pymt restarts the SOL
New Jersey	6 Yrs	Jdgmt can renew at 20 yrs - that's insane!
New Mexico	4 Yrs	Written acknowledgment or pymt restarts the SOL
New York	6 Yrs	Pymt w/o acknowledgment doesn't restart the SOL
North Carolina	3 Yrs	SOL runs from date of each individual charge
North Dakota	6 Yrs	Written acknowledgment, promise to pay, or payment restarts the SOL
Ohio	6 Yrs	Jdgmt can renew at 5 yrs
Oklahoma	5 Yrs	Jdgmt 5 yrs
Oregon	6 Yrs	Jdgmt 10 yrs
Pennsylvania	4 Yrs	Written acknowledgment, promise to pay or pymt restarts the SOL
Puerto Rico	3 Yrs	Jdgmt 15 yrs
Rhode Island	10 Yrs	Jdgmt 20 yrs.  Just slap me silly if I ever go nuts and move there!
South Carolina	3 Yrs	Written acknowledgment or partial pymt restarts the SOL
South Dakota	6 Yrs	Jdgmt 20 yrs.
Tennessee	6 Yrs	Jdgmt 10 yrs
Texas	4 Yrs	Pymt w/o acknowledgment doesn't restart the SOL
Utah	4 Yrs	Jdgmt 8 yrs. Written acknowledgment restarts SOL
Vermont	6 Yrs	Jdgmt 8 yrs
Virgin Islands	3 Yrs	Jdgmt 20 yrs
Virginia	3 Yrs	Jdgmt can renew at 10 yrs. Pymt w/o acknowledgment doesn't restart the SOL
Washington	6 Yrs	Jdgmt can renew at 10 yrs
West Virginia	5 Yrs	Acknowledging debt, promise to pay, any pymt restarts SOL. Be careful, it may apply to verbal/oral acknowledgment.
Wisconsin	6 Yrs	Pymt restarts the SOL
Wyoming	10 Yrs	Jdgmt 21 yrs. Again, just slap me silly if I ever go nuts and move there!

This information is believed to be correct as of the date of this post, but state laws and statutes can change.  You should also check your state statutes to verify that this information is correct, just to be on the safe side. Even though some states show that making a payment without an acknowledgement does not restart the SOL, to be on the safe side, Don't Make A Payment! Don't verbally or in writing admit that its your debt. Don't reaffirm, especially if you are near, at, or past the SOL. Doing any of these things will make the negative information stay on your credit longer. You're trying to improve your credit, not make it worse, right?

Again, just because you have hit the SOL for an alleged debt, it doesn't mean the lowlife, scumbag, junk debt buyers can't keep hounding you and keep trying to collect. If you are outside of the SOL, you will need to send them that C&D letter to make them go away.  I have a sample of one of the C&D letters I use on the post from April 30th, 2013 titled How To Stop Collectors and Creditors From Calling You. (It will open in a new window if you click this link).  

If you don't mind them calling you multiple times a day or using auto dialers, or any other violation of the FDCPA, FCRA, or TCPA (Telephone Consumer Protection Act), you can keep a notebook or log book and start documenting, then hit them with a "Notice of Demand" for their violations, notifying them if they don't remove the negative entries from your credit reports, you will be taking them to court.  There is a procedure for this, but I do have some friends that successfully have made some of them pay them as well as deleting the alleged accounts.

Well, hopefully this information will help you in your fight for better credit reports and good riddance of those pesky collectors.  If you need help with your credit repair, feel free to call or email me. I do respond and answer my phone.  If its a job you don't want to take on by yourself, again, just email or call me. My contact info is Waaaay up there at the top on the right (I know, this is a looooong post!). I would love to help you get the credit report that rightfully belongs to you!

How To Deal With Debt Collection Agencies ~ Part 2 (States With State Version Of The FDCPA)

The Fair Debt Collection Act (FDCPA) is a great weapon to use when repairing your credit.  However, it only applies to 3rd party collectors.  Most states have statutes or codes that deal with collections though they deal more with 3rd party conduct or contract terms.  But, there are a number of states that have their own version that mirrors the FDCPA except that it also includes original creditors.  So, when you are demanding validation, you will want to tell the 3rd party collectors that the demand for validation is pursuant to both the FDCPA and the state version. Unfortunately, some state Fair Credit laws or Fair Debt Collection laws or statutes  still do not include original creditors.  Some do include original creditors with the exception of demanding validation from them.  I will give you a not so well knowm tool to use also, that I recently found through research, that you can use for every single state, at the end of this post.  For now, here are the states with their own Fair Debt Collection Act that applies to original creditors:

State                Name of Law                                 Includes OC     
Arkansas -  AR Code Annotated  § 17-24-102         Yes                 
Mainly for conduct

California - Rosenthal Act                                     Yes                  
  Validation for Original Creditors (OC) is excluded

Connecticut - Connecticut FDCPA                          Yes                
Has a really interesting provision that sounds like they really
are not allowed to collect debts! It says:

1. § 36a-805   (3) purchase or receive assignments of claims for the purpose of collection or institute suit thereon in any court;

2. and § 36a-806 (b) No creditor shall retain, hire, or engage the services or continue to retain or engage the services of any other person who engages in the business of  a consumer collection agency and who is not licensed to act as such by the commissioner, if such creditor has actual knowledge that such person is not licensed by the commissioner to act as a consumer collection agency.

Florida - FL FDCPA & also                                  Yes
FL Consumer Collection Practices Act    ~ Not all rules apply to OC's or Lawyers

Iowa - Iowa FDCPA                                            Yes

Kansas - KS FDCPA                                            Yes
It really seems to only deal with banning illegal contracts and usury interest rates

Louisiana - LA FDCPA                                        Yes

Maine - Maine FDCPA                                        Yes but only if they use a different name for their collection division.   It mirrors the Federal FDCPA

Maryland - MD Consumer Debt Collection Act      Yes
This is a good one! Mirrors the FDCPA and includes OC's

Massachusetts - Consumer Debt Collection         Yes
Practices Regulations.  This is the first state to require OC's to VALIDATE!!

Michigan - Collection Practices Act                     Yes

New Hampshire - NH Debt Law                           Yes
Does not require an OC to validate

New York - NY Debt Collection Law                      Yes
Don't believe it includes validation for OC

North Carolina - NC Debt Collection Law              Yes
But it is for prohibiting unfair and deceptive practices

Oregon - OR Debt Collection Law                        Yes
Don't believe it includes validation for OC

Pennsylvania - Fair Credit Extension                    Yes
                         Uniformity Act
Concentrates on unfair and deceptive practices

South Carolina - SC Debt Collection Law              Yes

Texas - TX Debt Collection Act                             Yes

Vermont - VT FDCPA                                            Yes
OC's have to comply w/everything except validation

West Virginia - WV FDCPA                                  Yes
It appears that OC must validate

Wisconsin - Wisconsin Consumer Act                  Yes
Does not look like OC must validate

So, these are the states that definitely have some sort of debt collection law in place.  Now, most of them apply to unfair or deceptive business practices and not validation for original creditors.  You can dispute the alleged debt using the FCBA (Fair Credit Billing Act), which applies to all original creditors.  You can also use the FCRA (Fair Credit Reporting Act) if they are reporting on your credit.  You will want them to send you the hard copy documentation, which is their responsibility and also, its right there in the FCRA.  When you dispute with the bureaus, they are supposed to furnish your entire complaint/dispute to the creditor or furnisher of the information.  The bureaus have to also send you back the documented proof of the verification if you so request.

Now, here's my new secret weapon! It is the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) and it is "universal" but every state has statutes, so they will have a matching state commercial code.  Here is the code and then I'll explain it to you if you still don't get it.

UCC 3-501(b)(2)-(3)

• (2) Upon demand of the person to whom presentment is made, the person making presentment must (i) exhibit the instrument, (ii) give reasonable identification and, if presentment is made on behalf of another person, reasonable evidence of authority to do so, and (iii) sign a receipt on the instrument for any payment made or surrender the instrument if full payment is made.
• (3) Without dishonoring the instrument, the party to whom presentment is made may (i) return the instrument for lack of a necessary endorsement, or (ii) refuse payment or acceptance, for failure of the presentment to comply with the terms of the instrument, an agreement of the parties, or other applicable law or rule.

What this is saying is that whoever (creditor or collector) presents you with a bill, you can require them to "show you the note" or negotiable instrument, which would be a promissory note or the signed agreement.  The note they show you must be the original.  This code does not say a copy of the instrument, it says "the instrument."  They need to show you the original or a certified copy of the original, front and back sides.  They also have to prove that they own the "note" or that they have the authority to collect on it.  If they can't produce, they are in dishonor and you can refuse to pay, without penalty and still be "in-honor."

UCC 3-502 also talks about making late payments.  It states that if one fails to make a timely payment, but then pay it late and they do cash it, then you are considered in honor. My opinion of this is that if its paid, even though late, and they cash it, they should not be able to report late payments, because they agreed to take the payment on a different date and cashed it, it is paid on time.  I may be wishful thinking, but I read it so many times and that's how it looks to me.  Here's what it says:

• (f) If a draft is dishonored because timely acceptance of the draft was not made and the person entitled to demand acceptance consents to a late acceptance, from the time of acceptance the draft is treated as never having been dishonored.

See the word "never" in there?  It will be treated as never having been late, because it was considered dishonored originally because it was not paid on time.  But, when they accept the payment and cash it, it should wipe out the late!  Anyhow, that is my interpretation of it.

I would say, use the FDCPA and the state laws for 3rd party collectors and use the state version alone with original creditors, and hope it is received by an ignorant employee who doesn't realize that the state version still doesn't require validation, and you can get away with it.  Also, don't forget to use the FCBA, these UCC codes, and find your corresponding state commercial code to use against them as well.

I hope this post helps you.  Check back in about a week for my next post which will let you know the Statute of Limitations for each state.  Its important to know these as you can use them to make 3rd party debt collectors and original creditors, go away!

As always, if your credit report is looking pretty bad with a bunch of negative trade lines and you don't want to tackle it all by yourself, contact me by email or phone.  My contact info is up at the top, on the right hand side.  I would love to be the one you choose to help you with a fresh start!