Would this be considered harrassment? Debt collectors question

[whatehva]

What is the name of your state? TX-- question is based on a situation for someone living in OK

I'm new to this site, and I'm so glad I found it. So, HI.
Here's the situation:

Back in 2002, my mom purchased a car for me, in her name. I got bent on the car, but, that's not the point of my issue. It ended up getting repoed in 2005. The amount of the debt was $18K. The car was sold at auction for $6K. Total amount owed was $12K. She made payments to the original debtor, which took the debt down to around $11K.

The original creditor then sold the account to a debt collector, who contacted my mom to make payment arrangements with them, which she did. The original car payments were $553/mo. The original monthly debt payments were set at $163/mo. I put the money into her account every 2 weeks, which is then auto-paid to the debt collection agency.

Now, the payment has been raised to $190/mo. They receive their payment, automatically, every month, never late. Every month, they call my mom wanting a higher payment. Which, the last 2 times, she has agreed to pay--out of my pocket. I guess I need to note that AFTER the repo, her credit score was vastly improved. AFTER this agreement w/ the collection agency, being paid timely for a year now, her credit score is again higher than originally.

Every time they call, they threaten to sue her, tell her that they want more money, that she owes this much money (not even sure what it is, but, it's under $10K now), and she is going to pay whether or not she wants to, it's going to mess up her score, blah blah blah. They ask her if she can borrow the money from her mom (who's dead) or a friend? The answers are NO, this is HER debt (well, mine, but, it's in her name). My issue is that she IS paying. On a 10K car, her payments wouldn't even be as high as they are on this debt. NOW, they are wanting $300/mo. I told her tell them no. I can't afford it. If I could afford it, I would have a car (which I don't have now). If they get the $300, I won't ever get out of the debt that I already am in, and I won't be able to afford a car.

Well, they call her at least 3 times a day, every day. She has opted not to answer the phone. If you knew my mom, you would know that this is scaring the crap out of her. She doesn't want to get sued or have her house taken from her (they have a lien). It's eating her up.
My thought is...they are receiving payments, on time, w/ a reasonable amount. You see that I'm not trying to pay $50/mo, or $5/mo. And it's a debt collector...not the original creditor.

1. Would this be considered harrassment? I've read a lot about this collection agency, and have never read anything "good" about them. I'm not trying to get out of my debt (like I used to when I was younger--note my signature ), and neither is my mom, but, this is rediculous.

2. If it is considered harrassment, what can she do about it? Can she do anything to stop the calls when she is already making payments to them?

I would appreciate if no one made comments like, get over it, this is your debt, you're gonna pay, etc etc. Like I said, I'm making payments, accepting my responsibility, but, I have other bills to pay. If you've read my reply to another post, you know I have medical bills. I have thousands of $$ in medical bills as well as a student loan (that is finally almost paid off). And don't even try the math, these amounts are only what I can get from my mom and are most likely rounded to other digits. Only she has the original bills, etc from the collection agency.

Any help would be appreciated!
Thanks

 

[quincy]

I am not a debt collection expert person at all, so I would definitely wait for someone else to post, but:

You mentioned your mother has good credit. Would it be at all possible for her to get a bank loan, personal loan or equity loan, to cover the balance remaining on the debt, and pay off the collection agency in full? The bank loan would undoubtedly have lower payments and better terms, I would think, and they would certainly not be calling your mother 3 times a day for payments that are made on time. Plus, the monthly payments would not change on a whim.

The payment changes make me wonder: Is it the debt collection agency that has a lien on your mother's home? If so, that indicates to me that there was a judgment made against your mother for this debt. The judgment should have spelled out pretty clearly the amount the collection agency could collect per month, I would think. Hmm.

About the calls, I think your mother can request that they contact her only by mail.

Again, wait for others to post. I am out of my element here.

 

[moburkes]

They can call until she answers the phone. If she answers the phone, they cannot then call back later in the day.

 

[Chien]

I think quincy’s comments about the loan are interesting and worth some thought.

Your Mom can’t restrict them to exclusively mail contact. She could tell them to case and desist all communications. That very well could trigger a suit, despite the regular payments, as the remaining balance is large enough that they might feel it’s justified.

The specific “harassment” language that moburkes refers to is in Sect. 806(5) of the FDCPA and cites, “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.” Suggest that your Mom ask for a supervisor, explain that a call was made, the matter was discussed and she’ll start logging repeated calls.

A judgment would unfortunately almost certainly not include a specific amount to be paid. Some states allow a court to make such an order post-judgment, but it is based on a showing of financial hardship and is used sparingly, usually in Small Claims Courts. I don’t know if OK allows it at all but, more problematic is that it assumes a judgment, which you are trying to avoid. The balance will go up again, and your Mom’s credit record will suffer.

That brings this back to the point that quincy raised: what kind of lien is this, if there is no judgment? Did the original creditor impose a prejudgment lien and attachment? That’s possible but surprising, when they already had the right to repo the car.

Is the CA in OK? I think they are trying to scare her, and it seems to be working. There is the risk of suit, but I doubt that there is risk to her home. As a state, OK is as least as debtor-friendly as your own and provides for a complete homestead exemption. If your Mom has never claimed it, she should, and I haven’t found any provisions that would even allow a judgment to relate back to a pre-exemption lien.

I know you don’t want suit, but the loan sounds like a good idea and, if not that, consult with a local attorney and find out what her worst exposure might be. If it’s very minimal, you may be in a good position to negotiate a firm and unvarying payment agreement, rather than one that increases each month, simply because they couldn’t do better with a judgment than they can do getting voluntary payments.

 

[GulfBreeze]

a quick question. i have never had anything repo but...if someone fell behind in payments and was not able to catch up, why wouldnt they just try and sell it and cover the debt before it gets tasken and sold for 1/3 of the debt? if i bought a car for 20k and made payments for 3 years and got the loan down below what it was worth, it seems that someone might be able to sell it for at least what it was worth so as to pay off the loan...a lot better than owing the remaining 12k on a car you dont have no more...

 

[Debt Guy]

if someone fell behind in payments and was not able to catch up, why wouldnt they just try and sell it and cover the debt before it gets tasken and sold for 1/3 of the debt? if i bought a car for 20k and made payments for 3 years and got the loan down below what it was worth, it seems that someone might be able to sell it for at least what it was worth so as to pay off the loan...a lot better than owing the remaining 12k on a car you dont have no more..

Because they are a dumbass living in a State of Denial.

Your question is good and I am sure there are some who make the more common sense decision.

The OP needs to step up to the responsibility here and get his mom off the hook.

By the way, for the OP, the CA keeps asking for bigger payments because the debt is not amortizing fast enough. A 10K loan at 12% with paments of $190 a month will take six years to pay off. The rate is probably higher than 12%. Besides, six years is not a reasonable time to payoff a busted deal.

I will tell you from experience that they are not going to take payments for six years. They want their money in six months. If you think your mom is scared now, wait until she gets sued -- which will happen. The CA has absolutely no obligation to "work with" mom. The debt is in default and the entire balance is due.


Personal for Chien -- I'm having a fusion Tuesday on vertibrae in neck. People have always told me I was stiff-necked. Now they will be right in multiple ways.​

 

[whatehva]

First of all, let's get this out of the way...
I am not a dumbass living in denial. Denial of what, exactly? I came in here for advice, not for your sarcasm, thank you very much.
Anyways, I got bent over on the car in the first place. The car wasn't even worth the $6K they got for it. It was a piece, and I don't even know HOW they got that. I agreed to a higher amount than I could handle on my own, did really well for more than 2 years on paying the car. I started off w/ a husband, and ended up w/ a mooch. He never helped as he was supposed to. Overtime was cut after having it for 4 years straight...I struggled after it was cut, blah blah blah...SO, regardless of what YOU think, debtguy, I'm not trying to outrun the debt. I was only 2 months behind on the car when they repoed it (and had JUST made a payment the day before)...which is far enough, and I let it go after arguing and negotiating even BEFORE I was late on the payments. We tried everything to get the car transferred over, refinanced, etc even before it go to the point of repo. Found out we couldn't, b/c it was a secured loan (I guess...it's been a couple of years). This company would call a week before the payment was due and ask if she was going to pay it early.

As far as a loan for the amount, my mom is married to a man who has never liked me in the first place. Mostly for racist reasons being that I am a white woman who dates black men. SO, for her to take out a loan, although it IS a good idea, will most likely not happen.

I don't know how the judgements and such work in OK. All I know is that they can or have put a lien on her property. They have the right to do that. But, she's getting a house built, and as far as I know (again, what she's told me), they won't be able to take it. I don't know why, but, that's what she's told me.

If they're not allowed to call after speaking to her once, they do. They'll call her 3 or 4 times a day...yes, she's spoken to a supervisor, nothing's worked.
I will definitely ask her the questions you asked above, Chien, thank you for giving me the info. And I will once again, talk to her about taking out a loan for the amount owed. I know it would be cheaper...

For everyone else who has offered suggestions, I really appreciate it.

 

[jinky]

What they are doing is total harassment and your mother should send them a cease and desist letter. That letter allows them to only communicate by letter. I would suggest you read up on the FDCPA(Fair Debt Collection Practices Act). It explains what creditors can legally do.

This is just a small part of it:

Your Rights to Stop Harassment by the Debt Collectors
Insofar as collectors are concerned, you are not required:

1. To discuss anything with a collector unless you want to;
2. To answer a phone for a collector (this works with called ID).
3. To speak with the collector if you do answer.
4. To answer any questions at all posed by the collector (collectors will often demand that you rearrange your finances, or cut back on other expenses to pay them; there is no requirement that you justify your lifestyle to a collector).
5. To say "good-bye" before you hang up.
6. To be truthful about your personal and financial affairs (you do not have to disclose private information about assets or income).
7. Important: There is no reason you need to acknowledge that you owe the money! This is very important if the debt is old. By acknowledging the debt, you may actually extend the time the creditor can sue on it. All states have statutes of limitations on debt collecting. Few states are more than six years. Many are less. You can extend this limitation by acknowledge the debt or even by making a partial payment!

 

[moburkes]

Never base your ability to make payments on your ability to work overtime. As you know, its not guaranteed.

In any case, you got your mother into this problem, and you need to get her out. No, this is not harrassment.

 

[TigerD]

What they are doing is total harassment and your mother should send them a cease and desist letter. That letter allows them to only communicate by letter. I would suggest you read up on the FDCPA(Fair Debt Collection Practices Act). It explains what creditors can legally do.

Jinky,
You are wrong on many levels.
1. What you quoted has nothing to do with the FDCPA - it is a quote from another website used without permission or citation, which makes it stolen content and a violation of this site's TOS.
2. A cease and desist does not allow CAs to only contact a debt by mail -- it is an order to cease all contact short of a lawsuit. There is no remedy to provide contact only by mail in the law as written and interpreted.
3. Asking for or demanding more money in a payment arrangement isn't harassment. A payment arrangement is a courtesy - the balance is due in full.


FOR THE OP:
What the car is worth is not relevant -- only what you agreed to pay for the car. You and your mom need to do what it takes to handle the situation and not let it happen again.

DC

 

[jinky]

Jinky,
You are wrong on many levels.
1. What you quoted has nothing to do with the FDCPA - it is a quote from another website used without permission or citation, which makes it stolen content and a violation of this site's TOS.
2. A cease and desist does not allow CAs to only contact a debt by mail -- it is an order to cease all contact short of a lawsuit. There is no remedy to provide contact only by mail in the law as written and interpreted.
3. Asking for or demanding more money in a payment arrangement isn't harassment. A payment arrangement is a courtesy - the balance is due in full.


FOR THE OP:
What the car is worth is not relevant -- only what you agreed to pay for the car. You and your mom need to do what it takes to handle the situation and not let it happen again.

DC

A Debtcollector never likes to hear the truth.

 

[Chien]

Try to give someone the benefit of the doubt . . . .

Jinky - Here's the C&D section of the Act:
(c) CEASING COMMUNICATION. If a consumer notifies a debt collector in writing that the consumer refuses to pay a debt or that the consumer wishes the debt collector to cease further communication with the consumer, the debt collector shall not communicate further with the consumer with respect to such debt, except --
(1) to advise the consumer that the debt collector's further efforts are being terminated;
(2) to notify the consumer that the debt collector or creditor may invoke specified remedies which are ordinarily invoked by such debt collector or creditor; or
(3) where applicable, to notify the consumer that the debt collector or creditor intends to invoke a specified remedy.

One more permissible letter to say what's coming next. Now, you post authority for "that letter allows them to only communicate by letter".

I see you're already deleteing some former posts. That's a good start.

 

[jinky]

Try to give someone the benefit of the doubt . . . .

Jinky - Here's the C&D section of the Act:
(c) CEASING COMMUNICATION. If a consumer notifies a debt collector in writing that the consumer refuses to pay a debt or that the consumer wishes the debt collector to cease further communication with the consumer, the debt collector shall not communicate further with the consumer with respect to such debt, except --
(1) to advise the consumer that the debt collector's further efforts are being terminated;
(2) to notify the consumer that the debt collector or creditor may invoke specified remedies which are ordinarily invoked by such debt collector or creditor; or
(3) where applicable, to notify the consumer that the debt collector or creditor intends to invoke a specified remedy.

One more permissible letter to say what's coming next. Now, you post authority for "that letter allows them to only communicate by letter".

I see you're already deleteing some former posts. That's a good start.

I haven't deleted a thing. If there was any deleting it was done by whoever runs this site. And yes, it allows the creditor to communicate ONE more time by letter.

 

[jinky]

Try to give someone the benefit of the doubt . . . .

Jinky - Here's the C&D section of the Act:
(c) CEASING COMMUNICATION. If a consumer notifies a debt collector in writing that the consumer refuses to pay a debt or that the consumer wishes the debt collector to cease further communication with the consumer, the debt collector shall not communicate further with the consumer with respect to such debt, except --
(1) to advise the consumer that the debt collector's further efforts are being terminated;
(2) to notify the consumer that the debt collector or creditor may invoke specified remedies which are ordinarily invoked by such debt collector or creditor; or
(3) where applicable, to notify the consumer that the debt collector or creditor intends to invoke a specified remedy.

One more permissible letter to say what's coming next. Now, you post authority for "that letter allows them to only communicate by letter".

I see you're already deleteing some former posts. That's a good start.

I checked for deletions and as usual you don't know what you are talking about.

 

[whatehva]

1. I wasn't posting that the car was worth less than what I bought it for as a pity story. I was stating it to answer why I didn't sell it before so that I wouldn't owe as much money. Fact is...I saved myself money by letting them repo it.

2. I'm not trying to get rid of the collectors, I am paying the bills. It wasn't stated that it was a payment "arrangement", but, instead an "agreement". Ok, take it how you want to, but, we're talking about verbal agreements, which will stand up in court (not 100% of the time, but, at least part of the time-not to mention, they record their conversations).

3. I haven't gotten to talk to my mom this week, but, I definitely will. I want her to get out from under this, and it off of my conscience. Hopefully, she can go to her bank and get a loan. I already direct deposit into that... maybe that can be a contributing factor.

Believe me...I have learned great lessons. First one being, don't let people trick you into signing on a dotted line (it was a bait and switch tactic, and if I knew then what I know now...). Second one being, don't let collectors push you around. If they're gonna sue, they're gonna sue. But, this is MY lesson. My mom is a little weaker than I.

Thank you all again. I'll let you know what I find out...if anyone's interested.