Debt collectors utilize Facebook to embarrass those who owe

Debt collectors utilize Facebook to embarrass those who owe

www.wtsp.com

Tampa, Florida -- Debt collectors can be relentless and downright rude on the phone, but now a St. Petersburg woman is filing suit alleging the company that financed her car loan began harassing family members over the social networking website Facebook.

"Now Facebook does a debt collectors work for them. Now it's not only family members, it's all of your associates. It's a very powerful tool for debt collectors to use," says Howard.

(visit the link for the full news article)

Another facet of the potential problems with social networking sites that have been discussed here at length.

I have no problem with the firm reaching out to the woman regarding her debt. She signed a contract and they have made efforts to contact her regarding it (perhaps overly aggressive efforts, but reasonable efforts none the lesss).
She was not responsive to their calls.

There is also nothing wrong with the firm not choosing to cut her a break because she was sick and could not pay. They should of course endeavor to do that and by this story, you don't know if they did not, but they have no obligation to cut you any slack.

I do, however have a serious problem with them reaching out to friends and family regarding what is absolutely a private matter. Everyone has had issues where amounts have been in dispute and often it is not the consumer, but the firm who is at fault, not the consumer. Soliciting friends and family, which could easily include co-workers and employers should be against the law as a violation of privacy.

www.wtsp.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

There is a big difference between a debt collector and a creditor.

A creditor is not a debt collector, though they might attempt to collect debt through one of their own employees. So if you took out a loan with Ford Motor Credit and a Ford Motor Credit Employee calls you because you are behind on your payments this is not a debt collector.

If Ford though hires an outside company, or more likely sells your debt to an outside company then they are debt collectors.

The thing about debt collectors is that if they have purchased your debt, they have actually fulfilled your obligation to the creditor by buying out your contract. However they have no contract with you to pay them back for providing this 'service'.

Their efforts are then all about trying to form a contract with you, to make it a valid debt payable to them.

In reality in legaleese they are "Third party interlopers with no contractual standing". This is why debt collectors can not sue you in a court of law, because they do not have a valid contract with you. Your contract was only valid with the entities who were named specifically on it, and signatories to it at the date and time of your own signature approving the arrangement.

Your default, does not give them superceding rights to now become part of the contract.

Ideally they want you to pay them and to contract into paying them and will use a number of deceptive means to get you to accept that contract then with them.

The truth is if a debt collector bought your debt, you now legally owe no one anything in relation to that contract. The debt collector 'assumed a risk' in purchasing the contract, a risk that will be for naught if you fail to establish a contract with them that you owe them the debt now.

Agreeing with them on a recorded phone call that the debt is valid is a oral contract, signing anything that they send you in the mail with a 'payment offer' becomes a written contract.

Now since the creditor has sold the debt to the debt collector for pennies on the dollar, now you know about how much money you got fleeced in the original deal!

So how come the debt collector was able to purchase a risk right to something you paid many times more for?

All you have to say to any debt collector is this "You are a third party interloper with no contractual standing in a court of law, you are wasting your time attempting to contact me"

reply to post by dolphinfan
Debt collectors would stake out a funeral or a brothel. Facebook is an inevitable port of call for these guys.

I posted this comment to remain on topic. The real reason is to ask if that avatar is off the Blue Oyster Cult album from inside the gate fold sleeve? Curious.

reply to post by dolphinfan


This is one of many reasons why I won't join
facebook.I figure I give away enough info on
myself here,why go to that website?

Uk gov and police have done this to me. The people i went to school with where used to ridicule me. They use the net to take info from my life and put on net to ridicule me. This sort of thing is true.

By the way people i have never been in the army like they claimed on the net. They perve into our home pretending someone else doing something is me, lol.

These people really are below scum, and i mean this sort of thing is done by uk authorirites.

My life had nothing to do with the people i went to school with, but they somehow get this thing where they could perve into my life forever.

This is one of those things that is bad about the net. The thing is anyone who reads it thinks it is true.

Originally posted by dolphinfan
She signed a contract and they have made efforts to contact her regarding it

Does that contract grant them the right to contact her in what ever form they can? Because actions like this are akin to cyber stalking and harassment. If someone owed me money, and I harassed them through Facebook, I could get arrested. Why does the same not apply to debt collectors?

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
All you have to say to any debt collector is this "You are a third party interloper with no contractual standing in a court of law, you are wasting your time attempting to contact me"

Though I have know this, the way you laid it out in this post is awesome. Short and to the point and very easy to pass on to someone else. Thanks for that

Also there is another point... I helped a friend work through his debt problems a few years back and at one point one of the creditors actually took it to court. So he went to make payment arrangement through the court... but here is what happened...

First, before starting the session the Judge made a small speach. Basically he addressed the creditors in the room and told them while the debtor does owe you the money, he blamed the creditors for the problem. He said that creditors take advantage of human nature and offer money without properly checking to see if the client actually has the ability to repay.

I thought it was really interesting to hear a judge say that.

As to my friend when it was his turn, he said he could pay 100.00 per month... Judge looked at his income etc, and said "no... 25.00 per month"

So while debtors do owe the money... seems the system does not always favor the creditor

OH and since when did loan sharking become legal? They call it 'payday loans" now. Ever see the interest they charge? Much worse than the Mob ever did

As to Facebook... its an Evil CIA run operation... don't yawl pay attention here at ATS? I pulled my account when ATS attached to it. To many of my real contacts were on that.

reply to post by zorgon


Great post zorgon, and it's nice to see you back posting more frequently, I want to add.

As you pointed out, Judges in fact exist to find a remedy. They are only doing their job fully when they arrive at a remedy. So a good judge, is not going to offer as a remedy something that is not realistic, as that is no remedy at all. They have a fair idea of the cost of living, and how far one's income goes, and no, a good judge is not realistically going to expect you to starve, go homeless, or hitch hike to work to pay your creditors.

In fact good creditors are like good judges, a good creditor too exists to find a remedy, after all they would like to get paid back.

This is where many people end up denying creditors the ability to be good creditors. After they have failed to maintain their original obligation, and seek to address the problem with the creditor, they tend to feel like they have to over promise.

Your payment was supposed to be 500.00 a month, and the nice but stern representative says well we can drop it down to 350.00 but you have to send that 350.00 today and we have to recieve it by tomorrow.

Far too many people will say yes to that even though they know they only have 200.00 in their pocket, and can at best pay 200.00 a month.

So they over promise and then under deliver.

Be honest tell them the truth, no, I don't have 350.00 I have 200.00 and no I can't pay 350.00 a month, I would still be laid all the time or couldn't pay at all. I know though I can pay 200.00. The negotiators job is to get you to pay as much as you will agree too, but the debtor and creditor are only fooling one another when they fail to be fully honest.

Tell them the truth, after all if you don't make that 350.00 payment the next day and then every month, you are still going to end up in default and the little extra time you might have bought is not going to save your standing with the creditor or sometimes your property itself from being repossesed or foreclosed.

Be firm, be honest, say look I have 200.00 it's going to cost 20.00 to wire it to you, I can give you 180.00 now, and then 200.00 on the 15th of every month. If the negotiator says no, then ask them to run it by a supervisor, if the supervisor says no, ask to speak to the supervisor yourself, if they say no, ask to speak to their manager.

Ultimately the creditor really is looking for you to be credible, making agreements that you can't live up to is only going to prevent you from ever being credible and reliable, and that is when they will write off the debt, sell it to a debt collector, reposses or foreclose, once you have established that you have no credibility at all.

Judges aren't so unrealistic as Debtors or Creditors, they aren't there to make money for the Creditor like the Creditor's negotiater is, they are there to find a remedy!