In contrast to debt management plans in which consumers make monthly payments to creditors,
the debt settlement business model generally requires that a consumer stop making regular payments to creditors.
How could we achieve a more reliable
debt settlement business model for the consumer that needs to settle over time?
Any unearned funds help in a client trust account are returned to the client, and not pocketed as with the typical
debt settlement business model.
Not exact matches
The proposed regulations, put out for public comment Jan. 4, would ban high upfront fees and restrict the kinds of contracts
debt settlement companies can offer, effectively outlawing the
business model most popular with, among others, Cambridge Life Solutions, a company Matt McClearn and I wrote about in this magazine last fall.
Cambridge Life Solutions is not the only company in the
debt settlement business, nor is it the only one using the
model now banned in the U.S..
There are reasons for staff attorneys at NCLC and the FTC, and many others, to assume I worked at a nonprofit when I explained the
business model my company used for
debt settlement.
It seems in the face of proposed regulation over the
debt settlement industry many
debt settlement companies are running for the hills and trying to convert their
business into one of the many attorney
models out there...
Remember the
business model: because they've bought your
debt at a discount, collection agencies have room to negotiate a
settlement with you and still profit.
The NCLC concluded that
debt settlement companies use «a
business model that is inherently harmful to consumers» because consumers are required to pay high fees for
debt settlement programs that they are unable to complete, resulting in increased collection efforts and growing
debts while their creditors continue to pile on fees and interest accrues.
One argument I've heard before is that attorneys charge in advance for their services so
debt settlement attorneys would be entitled to carry on that
business model.