OC subject to FDCPA?

DUSTY · 12-03-2006, 07:16 PM

If the OC controls the actions of CA's

1) Make your check payable to OC.
2) 2nd CA only inserts tradeline (not showing as in dispute) and has no contact with 'Debtor'
3) OC directs CA to put collection 'on hold'

Would the OC be responsible for the actions of the CA's under the FDCPA if they are directing the actions and the totality of actions were to willfully violate 1692e

(2)
"The false representation of the legal status of any debt"
(8)
Communicating to any person credit information which is know to be false, including the failure to communicate that a disputed debt is disputed.

JayinGR · 12-03-2006, 07:27 PM

It all depnds on how you argue the case.

The OC could be liable for the CA's actions under the Res Ipsa Loquitur doctrine if I am correct but you would have to look into it further.

jlynn · 12-03-2006, 09:46 PM

Dusty - don't forget to review your state's laws.

roybean · 12-03-2006, 09:58 PM

An OC may be liable under 1692j. I am pretty sure that this is the issue with Capital One sending out letters telling people to call a collection agency when in fact the CA is not involved.

Pale Rider · 12-04-2006, 12:06 AM

An OC's failure to oversee the CA's activity is a violation of the FTC Act prohibiting unfair trade practice.

DUSTY · 12-04-2006, 08:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlynn

Dusty - don't forget to review your state's laws.

Definetely! After weighing the additional costs in terms of stress If I pursue this it would have to be in state court (yuck)since there would also be a UDP claim. This relates to Bellsouth charging me for a repair after I'd been paying for a maintenance agreement, then rotating it through the CA's.

In general, if 1692(e)(8) prohibits reporting a debt to another known to be in dispute without reporting that fact. But an OC doesn't fall under FDCPA.

Florida's 559.72 says the same thing but, would include an OC therefore the OC would have to report to the CA that the debt was in dispute when it was placed with the agency, right?

I've read how some COA Torts are preempted under FCRA 1681s-2.
Would any of F.S. 559.72 be preempted under circumstances such as

Florida's law allows a private COA without disputing with CRA (FCRA doesn't)

roybean · 12-04-2006, 02:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pale Rider

An OC's failure to oversee the CA's activity is a violation of the FTC Act prohibiting unfair trade practice.

What PR said, but the only thing is you have to make damn sure that the OC is aware of the CA's actions. I believe that I read this on Bud Hibbs site when I first started out. Write to the OC, and let them know how you're being treated and what the CA is doing and then you can hold the OC accountable for the CA's actions.

jlynn · 12-04-2006, 02:50 PM

Does the FTC Act have a private right of action?

Pale Rider · 12-04-2006, 06:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlynn

Does the FTC Act have a private right of action?

I haven't ever stopped to look. I'll check it.

DUSTY · 12-04-2006, 07:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roybean

you have to make damn sure that the OC is aware of the CA's actions. I believe that I read this on Bud Hibbs site when I first started out. Write to the OC, and let them know how you're being treated and what the CA is doing and then you can hold the OC accountable for the CA's actions.

1) If a tradeline is inserted AT the direction of the OC and no other contact is made by the CA then the OC must be directing.
2) I want to hold the OC responsible for the FDCPA violations of the CA's under one of the more general provisions and Florida CCP and the underlying cause of the debt as a UDP. I understand that a TORT can not generally be dismissed by MSJ?

Pale Rider · 12-04-2006, 07:35 PM

No private right of action for FTC Act. You have to use state UDAP statutes. Which it looks like Dusty is already planning.

http://www.ftc.gov/opa/predawn/F93/amerfamil5.htm - sample of FTC Act going after OC.

DUSTY · 12-06-2006, 10:35 AM

This is with Bellsouth. Now I know why sometimes it's better to stay off the phone, because now they're trying to cover their tracks. The CA deleted the TL saying what Bellsouth said the day before, it was being "put on hold" and could be put back on my CR at any time.

I paid every month for wiring maintenance.
I placed an order for a repair and in the recorded conversation was told "of course, there will be no charge".
They did charge me and then the games began.

So not only is there UDP involved with the collection activity, but also the underlying basis of the 'debt'.
I'm sure a state UDP case against a major utility would be a cakewalk, again HA HA

Excuse me I have to go to the law library now.

Lucy · 12-06-2006, 10:45 AM

File a complaint with your state public service commission, they regulate utilities.

P.S. Was this conversation with a service rep? Did a repair person physically come to your house for a repair? Was it inside or outside lines that needed repairing? I retired from Bellsouth and that is why I am asking these questions. There are if's ands or buts with them.