creditor hassment?

[bobo]

live in NC.

i owe a debt to a credit card company. its only about $700. well, i fell behind, and i am trying to make partial payments, but cant always do that either. now the bank is calling everyday from 8am til 9pm, at 15, 30, and 1 hr intervals asking for money. i dont answer the phone when i see its them, i get too upset. even tho my debt to them is legitimate, doesnt this constitute harrassment on their part? i spoke to a woman that called today from the bank, she told me it wasnt harassment, and told me to stop yelling at her!, i was angry. she said i was harrassing her! i told her that they, the bank are the people calling me 2-3 times an hr, and thats harrassment! where do i stand as far as getting them to stop callimg me? i know, pay them, but until i can pay...ty

bob

[BL]

FDCPA

805. Communication in connection with debt collection [15 USC 1692c]

(a) COMMUNICATION WITH THE CONSUMER GENERALLY. Without the prior consent of the consumer given directly to the debt collector or the express permission of a court of competent jurisdiction, a debt collector may not communicate with a consumer in connection with the collection of any debt --

(1) at any unusual time or place or a time or place known or which should be known to be inconvenient to the consumer. In the absence of knowledge of circumstances to the contrary, a debt collector shall assume that the convenient time for communicating with a consumer is after 8 o'clock antimeridian and before 9 o'clock postmeridian, local time at the consumer's location;

Sorry, keep your answering machine on , or caller ID , and don't speek to them , if you won't pay or can't pay the debt .

[bobo]

blonde lebinese,

ty for ur advice! one more question if i may? since the debt collector called me, and i didnt call him/her, even tho i was angry when i spoke to the colletor, wouldnt the person calling me be more guilty of harrassment than i would? even tho i may have acted out of line, i did not cuss, or slander the person,, but raised my voice conciderblly. if i on the other hand i called them, and gave them grief over the phone, i could be charged with harrassment?...ty again...bob

[BL]

Originally Posted by bobo

blonde lebinese,

ty for ur advice! one more question if i may? since the debt collector called me, and i didnt call him/her, even tho i was angry when i spoke to the colletor, wouldnt the person calling me be more guilty of harrassment than i would? even tho i may have acted out of line, i did not cuss, or slander the person,, but raised my voice conciderblly. if i on the other hand i called them, and gave them grief over the phone, i could be charged with harrassment?...ty again...bob

Your harassment theory is not going to work .
Their job is to try to collect the money you owe them , one way is too keep calling you hoping you'll get tired of the calls and just pay .
It can get nasty , as you get frustrated , they get frustrated , and the cycle never quits .
The collection Dept. knows where the fine line of harassment lies .

If you didn't dispute the debt as per terms of your agreement , just because you can't pay it know doesn't relieve you of your contractual obligations .

Believe me , I've been through the phone calls myself .

There is the FDCPA and FDRA , you should familiarize yourself with them . Request copies from the FTC , or veiw them online .

[bobo]

blonde ebinese,

thank you for the info. i understand what is going on, i just think a phone call every 15 minutes is out of line! if i call them like that, id probably have criminal charges against me!...bob

[debtcollector`]

Originally Posted by bobo

blonde ebinese,

thank you for the info. i understand what is going on, i just think a phone call every 15 minutes is out of line! if i call them like that, id probably have criminal charges against me!...bob

It doesn't count if you don't answer. It isn't harrassment if you don't answer.

If you call somebody and they don't answer their phone the logicall thing is to call back.

Now, I know somebody is going to point out a presumed violation of FDCPA section 806.

§ 806. Harassment or abuse [15 USC 1692d]
A debt collector may not engage in any conduct the natural consequence of which is to harass, oppress, or abuse any person in connection with the collection of a debt. Without limiting the general application of the foregoing, the following conduct is a violation of this section:

(5) Causing a telephone to ring or engaging any person in telephone conversation repeatedly or continuously with intent to annoy, abuse, or harass any person at the called number.

This requires that the intent of the debt collector is to annoy, abuse or harass. However, they are simply trying to get in contact with you. The CAs only intent is to get paid. Your feeling harassed is simply a byproduct ... and well, from the CAs point of view not worth considering. The auto dialer will call your number until contact is made and identity verified. Only then is it considered a contact and you wouldn't be called again today.

DC

PS: This discussion is completely irrelevant if you are being called by the bank that issued the card -- the FDCPA doesn't apply to orginal creditors.

[Ladynred]

PS: This discussion is completely irrelevant if you are being called by the bank that issued the card -- the FDCPA doesn't apply to orginal creditors

No, but state law might. Many states have their own version of the FDCPA that DOES apply the same rules to original creditors. North Carolina just happens to be one of them.

And then we have this from the FTC:

From the FTC Annual Report 2005: Fair Debt Collection Practices Act:

Complaints about creditors’ in-house collectors: The Commission also
received 20,573 complaints in 2004 about creditors that were collecting their own debts,
representing a substantial increase from 2003 in both percentage and absolute terms.17
Because creditors are not generally covered by the FDCPA, some in-house collectors use
no-holds-barred collection tactics in their dealings with consumers. While the
Commission cannot pursue such creditors under the FDCPA, it has done so under the
Federal Trade Commission Act (“FTC Act”) in the past, and will continue to do so in the
future as appropriate cases present themselves.18

18 For example, as discussed below, in the past year the Commission entered into consent
orders with two Pennsylvania companies whose collection practices it charged violated Section 5 of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45(a), which prohibits unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce. See infra at page 9.

In October 2004, the Commission approved a final consent order barring two
Pennsylvania companies, Applied Card Systems, Inc., and Applied Card Systems of
Pennsylvania, Inc., from engaging in a range of abusive and unfair collection practices.
In a complaint accompanying the consent order, the Commission alleged that company
representatives, among other things, regularly called consumers’ relatives, neighbors, and
employers for information about where consumers lived or worked, and that the representatives repeatedly harassed third parties, sometimes using abusive and obscene
language, even after the third parties said they had no information and asked the
representatives to stop calling. In addition to barring the companies from harassing and
abusing third parties, the consent order prohibits them from falsely representing the
amount or status of a debt, threatening to take action against a consumer that they do not
intend to take, collecting any amount other than the amount expressly stated in the
agreement that created the debt, and applying a consumer’s payment in a way that the
consumer has not directed. The consent order also contains record-keeping requirements
to help the Commission monitor the companies’ compliance with the order.