Buffalo NY Collector Shut Down

Over the past several years, many Arizona consumers have called with stories of harassment and threats by collection agencies or debt buyers from Buffalo New York. The threats include arrest, criminal action, legal action, loss of one's home and car, contacting employer, etc. Though these threats seem obviously illegal, many debtors get scared and pay these criminals money.

The Syracuse.com website recently posted a news article on Maurice Sessum, a Buffalo debt collector and owner of the collection agency 4 Star Resolution, was sentenced to 7 1/2 years in prison for fraud. Sessum was operating a collection which scammed thousands of consumers to overpay their debts by $31 million. 

The article outlines many of the false statements used by 4 Star and Sessum to defraud consumers, including:

• that 4 Star was affiliated with local government and law enforcement agencies

• that debtor had committed crimes, and if debt was not paid immediately, they would be arrested

• that driver's license would be suspended if debt not immediately

• false threats of legal action

Anytime you receive a call from a collector, make sure you know who they are, including the name and address of the agency, and that they have a legitimate claim that you owe them money. You can check to see if they are licensed by the Arizona Department of Financial Affairs here. (A company collecting its own debt does not have to be licensed.) Most importantly, if there is any doubt that the company is legitimate, contact a consumer protection lawyer. 

You can always call the Bybee Law Center, PLC at (480) 756-8822 to discuss a collection call. 

Sued by National Collegiate Student Loan Trusts?

If yes, then you may be in a position to get the case dismissed, according to a recent news article in the New York Times. The article states that National Collegiate Student Loan Trusts, or NCSLT, can’t find the paperwork for tens of thousands of debts which show that the account had been assigned to NCSLT. The missing documents prevent NCSLT from proving to the court that it is the current holder of the account and that loan is owed to it. 

According to the news article, “National Collegiate’s lawyers warned in a recent legal filing, ‘As news of the servicing issues and the trusts’ inability to produce the documents needed to foreclose on loans spreads, the likelihood of more defaults rises.’ ” What that means to you the debtor is that you may want to take a stand against NCSLT’s lawsuit to make them either prove the debt is owed to it, or get the case dismissed.

NCSLT sues in the name of its trusts with names like National Collegiate Student Loan Trust 2007-2, or National Collegiate Student Loan Trust 2006-1. NCSLT has filed hundreds of cases in Arizona over the past six years. 

You may also have other defenses to the lawsuit, including statute of limitations, school fraud, wrong venue, etc. 

For a consultation about your NCSLT case, give BYBEE LAW CENTER, PLC a call at (480) 756-8822 to set up an appointment to review your individual situation.

DEBT COLLECTOR REFUSES TO PAY JUDGMENT

Hutchinson Kansas debt collector National Credit Adjusters, LLC, which has offices in Arizona, refuses to pay a valid federal court judgment entered against it and in favor of an Arizona consumer.

National Credit was sued for violating the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, or FDCPA, when it attempted to collect on an internet payday loan which was void under Arizona law. The payday lender, Plain Green, LLC, offered internet payday loans to Arizona residents. However, the Arizona law which permitted payday loans expired on June 30, 2010, making all payday loans made after that date to Arizona consumers void and uncollectible. 

National Credit Adjusters failed to defend the lawsuit and the judge entered a default judgment against the collection agency. Even though several demands have been made to National Credit to pay the judgment, it has refused.

Once again, the collector now becomes the collected!

If you are receiving collection calls from National Credit Adjusters, LLC concerning a payday loan, you should seek the advise of a consumer lawyer who has extensive experience in these types of cases.

For a free phone consultation, please contact Floyd W. Bybee at the BYBEE LAW CENTER, PLC (480) 756-8822 .

Debt Collectors Are Prohibited From Contacting Debtors Who Are Represented By An Attorney

FDCPA Prohibits Contacting Represented Debtors

The federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act or FDCPA prohibits a debt collector, which includes collection agencies, debt buyers, and collection lawyers, from contacting a debtor who they know or should know is represented by a lawyer. This knowledge may come from the debtor telling the collector he has a lawyer, or may come from prior efforts to collect the debt. In any event, a debt collector who contacts a represented debtor is subject to claims under the FDCPA, including statutory damages of up to $1,000, and any actual damages. 

Portfolio Recovery Associates Sued For Collecting on a Settled Debt

Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC, or PRA is a huge debt buyer that files thousands of law suits every year to collect debts it has purchased for pennies on the dollar. PRA files hundreds of collection suits here in Arizona.

My office recently filed a case under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act or FDCPA against PRA for attempting to collect an alleged balance on a judgment which had been settled in full, and which had been set aside by the justice court so there was no longer a judgment.

Collection Abuse Continues Against Arizona Consumers

As this case illustrates, collection abuse by collection agencies, zombie debt buyers, and their collection lawyers continues in spite of federal law prohibiting their actions. The FDCPA prohibits a debt collector --- including collection agencies, zombie debt buyers, and collection attorneys --- from misrepresenting that a debt is owed when it is not. The FDCPA also prohibits a debt collector from attempting to collect amounts not owe, including aksing for payment of a debt which has already been settled. 

Maricopa County Superior Court Confirms Four Year Statute of Limitations in Auto Sales Contract

Maricopa County Superior Court reaffirms Four Year Statute of Limitations in Deficiency Claim

In the Case of Autovest, LLC v. Randall, CV2014-013134, Maricopa County Judge Karen A. Mullins reaffirmed that the statute of limitations to collect on a deficiency balance for an auto loan after repossession is only four years. If the car was purchased using a Retail Installment Sales Contract, and the dealer arranged the financing, then the statute of limitations runs four years after the car is repossessed.

Complete Defense to Colleciton Action

In Arizona, if you are sued by a lender for a deficiency balance after repossession, and the lender has waited four years or more to file suit, they you should have a complete defense to the collection action. Meaning, you should be able to get the case dismissed and not owe anything.

National Collegiate Student Loan Trust Loses Arbitration on Statute of Limitations

In a case where National Collegiate Student Loan Trust sued my client in Maricopa County Superior Court to collect on a private student loan, the arbitrator found in favor of the Arizona consumer and dismissed the claim.

Arizona Six-Year Statute of Limitations Applies to Private Student Loans. 

The statute of limitations on a private student loan is the same as any other credit or contract obligation. Thus, if it is a written contract,  signed in Arizona, the statute of limitations is usually six (6) years.

Arizona Four-Year Statute of Limitations Applies to Private Student Loans Incurred Outside of Arizona.

The exception to the six-year statute of limitations is a loan which was entered into in another state other than Arizona. For example, if you signed for the student loan while living in Oregon, then the Arizona four-year statute of limitations should apply.

National Collegiate Student Loan Trust sues Arizona consumers under under several different names, such as NCSLT 2006-1, 2006-3, 2007-2 or NCSLT 2007-4, etc.  

Defending a Lawsuit filed by Autovest, LLC

Have you been sued by Autovest, LLC?

Autovest has filed hundreds of lawsuits against Arizona debtors to collect deficiency balances on vehicles which were repossessed years ago. In many of the cases I have seen, the statute of limitations has passed. Meaning, you would have a complete defense to Autovest’s claim. Under Arizona law, an automobile lender generally has only four years after the repossession to file suit to collect any remaining balance. If it waits four years and 1 day, it is too late and you can get the case dismissed. 

Why then would Autovest sue on accounts which are Past the Statute of Limitations?

One might wonder why Autovest would sue someone on a debt if it knew the statute of limitations had run. Well, under the rules in Arizona courts, if you – the debtor – do not answer the lawsuit and raise the defense of statute of limitation, the defense is waived, meaning Autovest can get a judgment which it can then collect on. 

What should I do?

First off, do no wait to get help. If you wait too long, then Autovest can get its judgment and you will have to pay the old debt. 

Second, make sure you contact an experienced consumer lawyer in your state to assist you. If the statute of limitations has run, some consumer lawyers will agree to defend these Autovest cases with little or no cost to you.

Third, make sure you are not one of Autovest’s victims. Get help now!

Commercial Recovery Systems, Inc. Sued for Harassing Arizona Consumer

My office recently filed suit under the federal Fair Debt Collection Practice Act or FDCPA against Commercial Recovery Systems, Inc. (“CRS”) for calling and harassing an Arizona consumer over a debt which was beyond the statute of limitations. The complaint alleges that the debt is stale and beyond the Arizona statute of limitation to collect by legal action, yet CRS telephoned and threatened this Arizona debtor with legal action, including threats of wage garnishment, freezing of her bank account, taking her income tax refund, and placing a lien on her current vehicle if she did not pay.

The FDCPA protects Arizona consumers from these types of threatening calls from collection agencies. In this case CRS’s alleged actions are even more egregious since the collector’s manager got on the phone and confirmed that these actions would in fact be taken unless the account was paid.

If you are an Arizona consumer who is receiving harassing or threatening collection calls from Commercial Recovery Systems, Inc. or other collection agency, please call Floyd W. Bybee at the BYBEE LAW CENTER, PLC (480) 756-8822 for a free phone consultation to see what your rights are.

Northland Group Incorporated Sued for Collecting on Settled Debt

In December 2012, my office filed suit on behalf of an Arizona consumer who had previously settled her debt through Northland Group, and who was then subsequently contacted by Northland to collect on the same settled debt.

The Fair Debt Collection Practice Act or FDCPA protects Arizona consumers from receiving collection activity on an account which is not owed. In this case Northland’s actions are extra egregious since the account was settled through it and it knew that nothing more was owed on the account.

If you are an Arizona consumer who is receiving collection calls or letters on an account that you do not owe, or one that was previously settled, please call Floyd W. Bybee at the BYBEE LAW CENTER, PLC (480) 756-8822 for a free phone consultation to see if I can help you.

Can a Collection Agency or Attorney Serve Subpoena on Your Employer?

I have recently seen several Arizona cases where the collection agency served a subpoena on the debtor’s employer prior to obtaining a judgment. This is generally illegal. The only third party contact a collection agency can make prior to taking a judgment is for obtaining location information. If they subpoena your employer and ask for anything more, then they will most likely have violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, or FDCPA.

The subpoenas I have seen served on Arizona employers request information concerning the Arizona debtor’s bank account, drivers license, hire date, hourly rate, etc. All of this information is private and not allowed to be requested by subpoena in a collection lawsuit unless there has already been a judgment entered.

If you are an Arizona consumer who has been subjected to this kind of illegal invasion of your privacy, please call Floyd W. Bybee at the BYBEE LAW CENTER, PLC (480) 756-8822 for a free phone consultation.

West Asset Management Inc. Agrees to Pay $2.8 Million to Settle FTC Complaint.

The collection agency West Asset Management has agreed to pay a civil penalty to settle the Federal Trade Commission’s complaint against it for violating the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. West Asset Management was accused of the following illegal behavior:
 
•    Misrepresenting itself as a law firm or that its collectors are attorneys;
•    Misrepresenting that debtors will be arrested or have their property seized if they don’t pay;
•    Threatening actions that would be illegal, or actions that the company has no intention of taking;
•    Making false statements to collect a debt or obtain information about a consumer;
•    Withdrawing funds from consumers’ bank accounts or charging their credit cards without their consent;
•    Depositing postdated checks before the date on the check, or threatening to do so;
•    Revealing to third parties that a consumer owes a debt;
•    Asking a third party for a consumer’s location information more than once without the third party’s consent or a reasonable belief that the person’s earlier response was wrong or incomplete and that the person now has correct location information;
•    Calling consumers before 8 a.m. or after 9 p.m., or at their workplace;
•    Communicating with a consumer after receiving written notice that the consumer refuses to pay or wants the collector to stop calling; and
•    Using obscene or profane language, or harassing consumers with repeated phone calls.

West Asset is not the only agency that uses all or some of these illegal collection tactics against Arizona debtors.

If you are an Arizona consumer who has been contacted by a third-party debt collector or debt buyer and feel that their collection actions were deceptive, unfair, harassing, or abusive, please call attorney Floyd W. Bybee at the BYBEE LAW CENTER, PLC (480) 756-8822.

Equable Ascent Financial, LLC Loses Credit Card Collection Lawsuit and Ordered to Pay Consumer’s Attorney’s Fees.

A Maricopa County justice court recently ruled in favor of an Arizona consumer in credit card collection lawsuit brought by debt buyer Equable Ascent Financial, LLC. The Court has also ordered the debt buyer Equable to pay the consumer’s attorney fees.

The court held that Equable’s witness and exhibits were insufficient to prove that it owned the consumer’s credit card account it was attempting to collect, and entered judgment in the debtor’s favor.

Here is a short list of Debt Buyers who file suit against Arizona consumers:

Acarta, LLC
Action Financial
Arrow Financial Services (Delaware)
Asset Acceptance LLC (Delaware)
Bauhinia, LLC
CACV of Colorado
Cavalry Portfolio Services
Collins Financial
Copper State Financial Management, LLC
Debt Buyers Inc.
DSS Financial Group, LLC (Arizona)
Elche, LLC
Equable Ascent Financial, LLC
Fortis Capital LLC( Florida)
Incepta LLC
LVNV Funding, LLC
Main Street Acquisition Corp. (Maryland)
Masari Investments
Midland Funding, LLC
Midland Credit Management
Nu Island Partners, LLC
Palisades Recovery
Persolve, LLC (Delaware)
Precision Recovery Analytics, Inc.
Portfolio Recovery
Rail Limited Partnership
Skystreak LLC
Unifund CCR Partners
Velocity Investments
Western States Financial Management LLC
Worldwide Asset Management

If you are an Arizona consumer who has recently been served with a lawsuit by a debt buyer, please call Floyd W. Bybee at the BYBEE LAW CENTER, PLC (480) 756-8822 for a free phone consultation to see if you may have a defense to the lawsuit.

National Service Bureau Gets Sued in Arizona Federal Court

National Service Bureau, who true name is Seattle Service Bureau was recently sued by my office for violating the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ("FDCPA").  In the federal district court complaint, the Arizona consumer alleges that National Service Bureau repeatedly called her at work, left messages with co-workers, and never identified that he was trying to collect a debt, or that he was working for a collection agency. 

The reason so many Arizona debtors receive phone calls at work from collection agencies is that the agency is trying to harass or embarrass you.  Calls to work scare consumers into believing that if they don't pay the debt immediately, they may end of losing their jobs. AND IT WORKS!

Many times debts which are not owed are paid by scared consumers worried that they may lose their job if the calls continue.

Under the FDCPA, a collection agency that continues to call an Arizona debtor work, when they know that the debtor cannot receive personal calls at work violate the FDPCA. Leaving a message with a co-worker IS ALWAYS a violation of the FDCPA.

The FDCPA provides the Arizona consumer with the right to collect statutory damages of up to $1,000, plus any actual damages suffered. Actual damages includes emotional distress, humiliation and embarrassment.  The FDCPA also makes the debt collection agency, National Service Bureau in this case, pay for your attorney's fees and all the court costs.

If you are being harassed by a debt collection agency, feel free to call attorney Floyd W. Bybee to see if you have a claim.  The call consultation is free with no obligation.

ARIZONA Consumer Sues Allied Interstate for FDCPA Violations

We recently sued Allied Interstate LLC on behalf of an Arizona consumer for Allied's continuing attempts to collect a student loan debt that had been previously settled.  The Arizona consumer had settled his legal obligation on the debt over four years previously, but Allied continued to try to collect the debt.

Under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ("FDCPA"), a collection agency that continues to collect on a debt that it knows has been satisfied violates the FDPCA. 

The FDCPA provides the Arizona consumer with the right to collect statutory damages of up to $1,000, plus any actual damages suffered.  The FDCPA also makes the debt collection agency, Allied Interstate in this case, pay for your attorney's fees and all the court costs.

If you are being harassed by a debt collection agency, feel free to call attorney Floyd W. Bybee to see if you have a claim.  The call consultation is free with no obligation.

MIDLAND FUNDING LLC SUED OVER “ROBO-SIGNING”

Minnesota Attorney General, Lori Swanson, filed suit against Midland Funding, LLC for filing false and unreliable affidavits in debt collection lawsuits. These are the same “robo-signed” and unverified affidavits Midland files in its Arizona collection cases.

To read the full story go here: http://www.startribune.com/business/118777379.html

What To Do If You Have Been Sued by Midland Funding, LLC

If you have recently been sued by Midland Funding, LLC, or its sister collection agency, Midland Credit Management, Inc., and believe that do not owe the debt, please contact Floyd W. Bybee at 480-756-8822

FTC Issues 2010 Annual Report on FDCPA to Congress

FTC Reports Consumer Complaints Rise 17% in 2010

The Federal Trade Commission recently issued its 2011 annual report to Congress on the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) showing that consumer debt collection complaints rose 17% in 2010.  The federal agency received 140,036 debt collection complaints in 2010 compared to 119,609 in 2009.  The FTC also reported that it received more complaints about the debt collection industry than from any other specific industry.


Top Categories for Debt Collection Complaints

The top areas which consumers complain about were:

•    calling repeatedly or continuously

•    misrepresenting the character, amount or status of the debt (including demanding a larger payment that is permitted by law)

•    Failing to send consumers the required written notice about the debt and their rights

•    Threatening dire consequences if the consumer fails to pay, including false threats of legal action, threats of criminal prosecution, wage garnishment, and damage to consumer’s credit rating.

•    Failing to identify that it is a debt collector

•    Revealing alleged debt to third parties, including family, friends, and co-workers.

•    Calls to consumer’s place of employment

•    Failing to verify disputed debts

•    Continuing to contact consumers after receiving written notice to stop all communication.


FTC Provides Information About Consumers’ Rights

The FTC’s “Debt Collection FAQs: Guide for Consumers” brochure is available at http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/consumer/credit/cre18.shtm.  The FTC also has an animated video that explains consumer rights regarding debt collection. It can be viewed at http://www.ftc.gov/debtcollection and http://www.youtube.com/ftcvideos.


FDCPA Prohibits Deceptive, Unfair and Abusive Practices

The FDCPA prohibits debt collectors from using any deceptive, unfair, and abusive collection tactics to attempt to collect a debt. Though the FTC may take action against some third-party debt collectors or debt-buyers, most Arizona consumers will obtain relief only from bringing a private action in Arizona courts.


If you are an Arizona consumer who has been contacted by a third-party debt collector or debt buyer and feel that their collection actions were deceptive, unfair, harassing, or abusive, please call Floyd W. Bybee at the BYBEE LAW CENTER, PLC (480) 756-8822.


MIDLAND CREDIT MANAGEMENT, INC. CONTINUES TO COLLECT FROM ARIZONA CONSUMERS AFTER CONSUMERS FILE BANKRUPTCY

Midland Credit Management, Inc. Continues Collection of Accounts from Arizona Debtors after Receiving Notice of Bankruptcy Filing.

Midland Credit Management, Inc., the sister company to Midland Funding, LLC, seems to have made it a regular practice to ignore the notices it and Midland Funding, LLC receives from the bankruptcy court so that it can continue to collect against Arizona consumers. Midland’s actions are illegal.

Arizona Debtor Sues Midland Credit Management, Inc. in Arizona Federal District Court for Harassing Phone Calls.

In December 2010, I filed a suit under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act or FDCPA against Midland Credit Management on behalf of an Arizona consumer who, after filing bankruptcy, continued to receive numerous harassing telephone calls from Midland.  Midland ignored the consumer’s efforts to tell the collector that she had filed bankruptcy and that she had an attorney.  Midland continued to collect on a debt that she had included in her bankruptcy.

Before the calls began, Midland Credit Management and Midland Funding, LLC had received two notices from the bankruptcy court of the consumer’s bankruptcy filing.  One notice was mailed to Midland by the bankruptcy court, and the other was electronically send by the court.  Both notices informed Midland that the debtor was represented by a lawyer, and thus it was illegal for Midland to directly contact the consumer and to attempt to collect the debt.

Arizona Consumer Sues Midland Credit Management, Inc. in Arizona Federal District Court for Contacting Her after She Had Filed Bankruptcy and Knowing She Was Represented by a Lawyer.

In the second case, Midland Credit Management, Inc. had received two electronic notices from the bankruptcy court in early November 2010 of the consumers’ bankruptcy filing.  Despite these notices, Midland sent two letters, one in November and one in December, directly to the wife demanding payment on an account it claimed was owed.  Midland also directly sent the husband a letter in January 2011 on another account that was in his name only.

FDCPA Prohibits Direct Communication with a Consumer it Knows Is Represented by a Lawyer.

The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act or FDCPA protects Arizona consumers from debt collectors communicating directly with them once they have hired a lawyer.  So, any Arizona debtor who files bankruptcy using a bankruptcy lawyer should not receive any direct contact from a debt collector.  And, if a debt collector does contact the consumer directly, then the creditor would be in violation of the FDCPA.

If you are an Arizona consumer who has filed bankruptcy using a lawyer, and has been contacted by a debt collector after the bankruptcy, please call Floyd W. Bybee at the BYBEE LAW CENTER, PLC (480) 756-8822 for a free phone consultation to see if I can help you.

Why Debt Buyers Must Provide Proof Debt Ownership

I regularly hear debt buyers filing suit in Arizona courts argue that of course they own the old credit card account they are attempting to collect, otherwise they would not be suing the debtor.  And, since they say the own the debt, they do not need to provide any verifiable proof of ownership. 

When challenged to provide proof of ownership, these same debt buyers usually come up with a copy of a billing statement or two from the original credit card company, and argue that their possession of these billing statements proves that in fact they own the debt.  Other times, they simply get one of their own employees to sign an affidavit saying that the debt buyer owns the debt.

Why You Must Require Debt Buyers to Provide Verifiable Proof of Ownership.

The Associate Press recently reported that the director of a Buffalo debt collection company had sold information from the company’s computer files to two illegitimate debt collectors who then scared consumers into paying made-up debts.  There have been other reports of debt buyers selling the same account to two or more debt buyers, who both later attempt to collect on the same debt.

If you have been sued by a debt buyer, make them provide absolute proof that they are the rightful owner and assignee of the original credit card company.  They will seldom be able or willing to do so. 

If you are an Arizona consumer who has recently been served with a lawsuit by a debt buyer, please call Floyd W. Bybee at the BYBEE LAW CENTER, PLC (480) 756-8822 for a free phone consultation to see if you may have a defense to the lawsuit.

Arizona Federal Court finds Gurstel Staloch & Chargo Violated FDCPA.

In a recently published decision, a federal Magistrate Judge for the District of Arizona found that Gurstel, Staloch & Chargo, P.A., now known as Gurstel Chargo, P.A., now known as Gurstel Law Firm, P.C., violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) because it failed to ceased communications with the consumer after she notified Gurstel both verbally and in writing that she was represented by a lawyer.  The Court also found that Gurstel violated the FDCPA by continuing to contact the consumer after she notified the firm that she disputed the debt, refused to pay, and demanded that Gurstel cease all communications with her.

A copy of the decision can be reviewed here.

If you have sent a letter (certified return receipt requested) to a debt collection company telling it that you refuse to pay the debt, or that you want it to stop contacting you, but they continue to call and / or write you, then it is violating the FDCPA as Gurstel did in this case.  You would be able to sue the collection agency and recover damages.

If you are an Arizona consumer being harassed or threatened by a debt collector or junk-debt buyer regarding a consumer debt, I can help.  Please call Floyd W. Bybee at 480-756-8822