You are you viewing the Bankruptcy Forum as a guest (limited viewing).
Don't have a BKForum account yet?
Please REGISTER (it's FREE & takes 30 seconds) so you can post your own questions and see all the features available to registered users.
That is right. How even more pathetic, I have more than one collector calling me and I get the names confused. They are horrible. I have some cc that I owe over 15,000 and they stoppped after I gave them my lawyers number. Not Target!!!!!
Thanks. I betcha it is Target. I just called the number and it rings four times and then all I get is a "leave a message" message.
Target has called me at work before and when I explained to them that I cannot be called there, they were very nasty and would not get off the phone. By far nastier than anyone else I have spoken to...and they would not take my lawyer's name and number.
I am calling first thing in the morning and YES, they have definitely violated the FDCPA. Since the cat is out of the bag, I have a good mind to tell my supervisor to tape any more instances, since I doubt I can get them to stop that auto-dialer immediately. I know it's troublesome to go after creditors that violate the rules but this really, really pisses me off.
BTW, I owe Target very little.
I posted in another thread that I had gotten a new call on Thursday at home while I was dropping off the paperwork for my lawyer. This is probably the same number, though I can't locate it right now and I am livid that they gave me no time to respond.
Epi, just so you know...the FDCPA rules apply only to debt collectors, not an original creditor. Unless Target has already sold your debt to a collection agency and the CA is the one calling you at work after you told them you can't accept personal calls there, you have no FDCPA violation.
Epi, just so you know...the FDCPA rules apply only to debt collectors, not an original creditor. Unless Target has already sold your debt to a collection agency and the CA is the one calling you at work after you told them you can't accept personal calls there, you have no FDCPA violation.
Understood, however, I am in California and I believe that this behavior would be covered by the RFDCAP even if by an original creditor.
That being said, I do believe that this IS a collection agency and that it does not matter, be it federal or state law, if the debt has been sold or assigned. The FDCPA would apply.
I have already told these people that I cannot be called at work and It was ARM, now that I think about it, (okay, that should have been in writing and was not) and that I have an attorney (and as I understand it, that does not matter whether it is in writing or not.)
ARM and NCO were the two CAs that initially ignored me when I told them I couldn't be called at work. It took three or four times for someone to actually enter that information into the computer - then the calls at work finally stopped.
In NY, I did not have to notify them in writing; verbal notification was sufficient. My lawyer provided me with an info sheet about my collection rights and the phone numbers to call to report any violators (NYS Attorney General, FTC & the Department of Consumer Affairs). I chose not to pursue any action, however, since they did stop eventually.
Ch. 7 filed: 6/13/08, Friday the 13th!
341 hearing: 7/10/08
Last day for objections: 9/8/08
Discharged: 9/18/08
I just called and yes, It was ARM, although it was like pulling teeth to actually get that information. I informed the guy that I was filing BK and he refused to take the information, saying that he needed an 11.00 payment. I told him no, and he said, c'mon, it's 11.00. I said no again and was mid sentence when he hung up on me!
I called back and talked to a woman and told her that someone had just hung up on me. She did take the BK info and said that she would put it in the computer and that the calls should stop.
She said that they were allowed to call me at work and I told her that they were not allowed to state that they were collecting a debt and she agreed with me. However, I have my doubts that this is the end of it.
Comment