Debt Firms Slammed by Consumer Lawsuits

hannah · 06-12-2007, 01:26 PM

Good article from The National Law Review. The debt collection law firms are whining...

Read article reprinted in law.com.

cajunbulldog · 06-12-2007, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hannah

Good article from The National Law Review. The debt collection law firms are whining...

Read article reprinted in law.com.

One reaps what one sows!

jlynn · 06-12-2007, 01:50 PM

LOL - My whaaaambulance is getting to be very busy.

Hedwig · 06-12-2007, 02:17 PM

I love the end: "It's hard to give clients advice."

What's so hard about read the FCRA and FDCPA, read them again, read them some more, and abide by them.

All the advice needed.

centex · 06-12-2007, 04:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hedwig

I love the end: "It's hard to give clients advice."

What's so hard about read the FCRA and FDCPA, read them again, read them some more, and abide by them.

All the advice needed.

It is a little less clear than that though...since not all of the Circuits are on the same page, guidance that is valid in one part of the country may not be valid a thousand miles away. And, guidance given today can change 180 degrees with a ruling that comes out next week. So, if you change what you are doing but the case is later reversed and remanded, then you are back in the boat of having given 'bad' guidance for that period of time.

roybean · 06-12-2007, 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hannah

Good article from The National Law Review. The debt collection law firms are whining...

Read article reprinted in law.com.

We need some wine and cheese to go along with the violins.

FixinThings · 06-12-2007, 05:16 PM

There is an interesting assumption in the article that indicates that debt collection attorneys feel entitltled to a blanket amnesty for any infraction of the FDCPA...

Since when are those engaged with the law come to be above it?

As Hedwig suggests, what's vague about the law is debt collection industries' understanding of it.

Centex's statment on the lack of consistency in intepretation is quite true. But it cuts both ways. Both parties are faced with changing and changable interpretations as they pursue their interests.

jlynn · 06-12-2007, 08:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by centex

So, if you change what you are doing but the case is later reversed and remanded, then you are back in the boat of having given 'bad' guidance for that period of time.

Well, I would assume its not unlike any attorney who chooses to specialize - you do what you have to do to keep up with the latest information. Any erroneous guidance given for some period of time (since no one will know what that time is until litigated), there is the use of the bona fide error defense. That defense is not accorded to all legal specialty arenas I suspect. I mean, you, Centex, don't have the Oopsie defense at hand, if you blow a criminal case because you missed some newer case law, right? Your ignorance would not be an excuse.

Hedwig · 06-12-2007, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roybean

We need some wine and cheese to go along with the violins.

How's this???

roybean · 06-12-2007, 08:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hedwig

How's this???

The music can play on now!

hannah · 06-12-2007, 08:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roybean

We need some wine and cheese to go along with the violins.

spinn · 06-12-2007, 08:52 PM

When did lying in court or in papers become good advice?

And can someone show me case law from any circuit that says lying is not an FDCPA violation?

They have never looked so pathetic.

Hedwig · 06-12-2007, 09:29 PM

I don't think lying is a violation of the FDCPA. It's a violation of the United States Code, specifically USC TITLE 18 PART I CHAPTER 79 § 1621.

hannah · 06-12-2007, 09:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hedwig

I don't think lying is a violation of the FDCPA. It's a violation of the United States Code, specifically USC TITLE 18 PART I CHAPTER 79 § 1621.

And grounds for a state ethics violation.

jlynn · 06-12-2007, 10:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hedwig

I don't think lying is a violation of the FDCPA.

§ 807. False or misleading representations [15 USC 1692e]

A debt collector may not use any false, deceptive, or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt. Without limiting the general application of the foregoing, the following conduct is a violation of this section: