They quickly zeroed in
on debt collection cases as an area of critical need, finding:
Not exact matches
Specifically, Defendants made false and / or misleading statements and / or failed to disclose that: (i) the Company was engaged in predatory lending practices that saddled subprime borrowers and / or those with poor or limited credit histories with high - interest rate
debt that they could not repay; (ii) many of the Company's customers were using Qudian - provided loans to repay their existing loans, thereby inflating the Company's revenues and active borrower numbers and increasing the likelihood of defaults; (iii) the Company was providing online loans to college students despite a governmental ban
on the practice; (iv) the Company was engaged overly aggressive and improper
collection practices; (v) the Company had understated the number of its non-performing loans in the Registration Statement and Prospectus; (vi) because of the Company's improper lending, underwriting and
collection practices it was subject to a heightened risk of adverse actions by Chinese regulators; (vii) the Company's largest sales platform and strategic partner, Alipay, and Ant Financial, could unilaterally cap the APR for loans provided by Qudian; (viii) the Company had failed to implement necessary safeguards to protect customer data; (ix) data for nearly one million Company customers had been leaked for sale to the black market, including names, addresses, phone numbers, loan information, accounts and, in some
cases, passwords to CHIS, the state - backed higher - education qualification verification institution in China, subjecting the Company to undisclosed risks of penalties and financial and reputational harm; and (x) as a result of the foregoing, Qudian's public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.
There was concern
on the part of some owners over how Navarro made his money — a piece of it was in
debt collection — and a
case he settled in New York in 2014 over «repeatedly bringing improper
debt collection actions against New York consumers.»
In some
cases, you may hear directly from a
collection agency before you discover medical
debt on your credit report.
In that
case, you could have a new account being reported
on your credit report from the
collection agency that owns the
debt.
Sprinkle in just a few
cases of «Yeah, I couldn't pay my cell phone bill so I just let them cut it off, but the
collections agency started calling and mailing me every day and I had to pay twice what I owed in the first place to make it stop», which filters through the collective psyche of the masses, and all of a sudden if and when they do offer a deal
on a
debt you fell behind
on, you jump
on it.
They should stop attempts to collect
debts without proper information and documentation about the
debt, stop
debt collectors from bringing robo - signed
cases in court, crack down
on widespread use of threats, harassment and embarrassment in
debt collection, and protect consumers from having their credit records unfairly affected by medical
debt, among other actions.
Once a
debt is disputed the
debt collection company has 30 days to provide everything being requested or stop
collection on the
debt, and in many
cases, they can't produce what's required so consumers get to walk away without paying.
If you opt not to pay, based
on the
debt's age,
collection agencies may no longer have a
case against you.
Although it's not a common practice, lenders of title loans can turn your
case over to a
collection agency if you default
on payments, so read
on to find out about what
debt collectors can not do:
After 6 - months of being delinquent
on payments, your account will also have been written - off in most
cases, and sold to a
debt collection company.
Third party
debt collection companies can purchase
debts for as cheap as 4 - cents
on the dollar, and therefore; they make many errors not putting the necessary time and care into maintaining appropriate documents and accurate information, making these
debts disputable and in many
cases — unverifiable.
The primary consumer protection problem areas that have given rise to the States» actions include: (1) unsubstantiated claims of consumer savings; (2) deceptive representations about the length of time necessary to complete a
debt relief program; (3) misleading or failing to adequately inform consumers that they will be subject to continued
collection efforts, including lawsuits, and that their account balances will increase due to extended nonpayment under the program; (4) deceptive disparagement of consumer credit counseling; (5) deceptive disparagement of bankruptcy as an alternative for debtors; (6) lack of screening and analysis to determine suitability of
debt relief programs for individual debtors; (7) the
collection of substantial up - front fees so the
debt relief company gains even if it fails to perform; (8) lack of transparency and information for consumers as to payment of fees, status of accounts, and communications with creditors; (9) significant delays in active negotiation or engagement with creditors, coupled with prohibitions
on direct consumer communications with creditors; and (10), in the
case of
debt settlement companies, basing savings claims (and settlement fees) not
on the original account balance, but
on the inflated amount due (including late fees and default rates of interest) at the time of settlement.
Filing for bankruptcy also automatically protects you from
collection actions
on all of your
debts, at least until the bankruptcy
case is resolved or until the creditor gets permission from the court to start collecting again.
In addition, when someone files for bankruptcy, all
collection actions are automatically temporarily stopped
on all of his or her
debts, at least until the bankruptcy
case is resolved or until the creditor gets special permission from the court to start collecting again.
Ever since 2008, more and more cross border disputes I was instructed
on were
debt collection cases, and most of them were, not just some simple...
I practice in some federal court, but I practice a lot in state court and because I handled
debt collection cases, I sued the
debt collectors and I defended people sued by
debt collectors, I used to sit in
on some of those similar calendars.
I defend consumers in
debt collection cases and depending
on the amount of the
debt, and other factors, I explain to them that hiring me is not the most effective use of their money.
John Skiba is a consumer protection attorney in Arizona focusing
on debt collection litigation and FDCPA
cases.
Ella focuses her practice
on complex commercial litigation, including contract disputes and non-compete agreements, drawing
on her experience in state and federal courts, as well as bankruptcy litigation, and
cases involving the Fair
Debt Collections Practice Act and Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act.
Ever since 2008, more and more cross border disputes I was instructed
on were
debt collection cases, and most of them were, not just some simple default in payments, but resulted from the financial crisis the whole world was facing, which made such disputes a lot more complicated than they should have been.
Mr. Murtha has written and taught
on the subjects and has successfully litigated
cases in defense of consumers» rights, protecting them from the unfair practices of
debt -
collection agencies, creditors, automobile dealerships, banks, student loan companies and other businesses in both state and federal courts.
However, your ex-spouse's Chapter 13 bankruptcy offers you the protection of an automatic stay, or postponement, of
collection actions
on joint
debts, so the creditors can not come after either of you while the Chapter 13
case is pending.
The question of whether an attorney is regularly engaged in
debt collection is made by courts
on a
case - by -
case basis, with courts looking at factors such as percentage of revenue generated by the
debt - collecting activities; the volume of
debt - collecting activities; and whether the attorney has an
on - going relationship with a
collection service.