Collections with no contract

[bradepperson]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Texas

I have a bill collector who has an attorney send me a letter that they have filed a lawsuit against me for an amount they say I owe them. Now, my understanding with contracts is that the contract is between the company providing the credit and the person the contract was entered into with (This goes for any type of contract). So if a debt is sold from one company to another, how does that hold the original person responsible for monies which the original creditor and said party entered into a contract owed to said 3rd party? Unlike a mortgage, creditors generally do not state that if the debt is defaulted on that they may transfer your contract to a 3rd party. They purchased a right to go after the monies for sure, but there is no contract making it required by the debtor (from a contract standpoint). So if there is no contract which states this how can a person be responsible for something that the creditor sells to a 3rd party? There was no contract with the collector, so how can the funds be collected by a 3rd party when the original party is not doing by paying a collector under the contract singed by the 2 parties? For example, if I sell a car to someone and he/she sells it to another person then the other person is not obligated to me. Rather the person who I sold the car to is. I cannot go after the person who I did not have a contract with. I must go after the person whom I had a contract with. Therefore, if I hire, a collector to go after a "debt" of the funds owed to me does not mean that the Collection agency has removed the contract created between myself and the original person. They are not collecting for themselves, but I am paying them to collect therefore it they are making money from me for the debt. Again, if you default on a car, which you purchased, it is not the bill collector who repossess the car. Rather it is the lender it's self. Because they are the ones who have a contract with. It is simply that I hired someone to collect for ME. The collection agencies are collecting for themselves, which the person did not have a contract with. Please let me know how a Collection agency has any right to sue you for a debt which they purchased, but do not have a contract with you? Now if the original contract states that the creditor may sell the debt to a 3rd party, like a Mortgage, then that is different as that contract allows for this.

 

[Zigner]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Texas

I have a bill collector who has an attorney send me a letter that they have filed a lawsuit against me for an amount they say I owe them. Now, my understanding with contracts is that the contract is between the company providing the credit and the person the contract was entered into with (This goes for any type of contract). So if a debt is sold from one company to another, how does that hold the original person responsible for monies which the original creditor and said party entered into a contract owed to said 3rd party? Unlike a mortgage, creditors generally do not state that if the debt is defaulted on that they may transfer your contract to a 3rd party. They purchased a right to go after the monies for sure, but there is no contract making it required by the debtor (from a contract standpoint). So if there is no contract which states this how can a person be responsible for something that the creditor sells to a 3rd party? There was no contract with the collector, so how can the funds be collected by a 3rd party when the original party is not doing by paying a collector under the contract singed by the 2 parties? For example, if I sell a car to someone and he/she sells it to another person then the other person is not obligated to me. Rather the person who I sold the car to is. I cannot go after the person who I did not have a contract with. I must go after the person whom I had a contract with. Therefore, if I hire, a collector to go after a "debt" of the funds owed to me does not mean that the Collection agency has removed the contract created between myself and the original person. They are not collecting for themselves, but I am paying them to collect therefore it they are making money from me for the debt. Again, if you default on a car, which you purchased, it is not the bill collector who repossess the car. Rather it is the lender it's self. Because they are the ones who have a contract with. It is simply that I hired someone to collect for ME. The collection agencies are collecting for themselves, which the person did not have a contract with. Please let me know how a Collection agency has any right to sue you for a debt which they purchased, but do not have a contract with you? Now if the original contract states that the creditor may sell the debt to a 3rd party, like a Mortgage, then that is different as that contract allows for this.

One can sell their right to collect the debt. Pay what you owe.

 

[FlyingRon]

Contracts are generally assignable unless the law or the contract says they aren't. However, I can almost guarantee that your contract for this debt included an explicit statement that it was assignable. They didn't even have to wait until you are delinquent. Accounts are assigned form one organization to another all the time. If the contract has been assigned (purchased or otherwise transferred), then the new owner can indeed sue you. If they were merely attempting collections on a debt for another party who still owns the debt, then they must comply with the rules for collection agencies, and the law suit would have to be brought in the name of the owner of the debt. Of course, the actual people doing the work on the lawsuit are going to be lawyers anyhow, the primary difference is who's name is listed as plaintiff.