StoptheCallsFast Brought Joy To Some People This Holiday Season

I Feel Like Santa Claus: Two Clients In Particular Stand Out As Being Elated In December

The most satisfying aspect of what StoptheCallsFast does is to see a positive outcome to potentially bad situation. Recently two people came to me for different reasons. One of them was being harassed by the infamous Palisades Acquisiitons (Asta Funding); the other party came to me 3 years after $4700 was sucked out of her bank account under some very questionable circumstances as a result of a lawsuit brought by another famous debt predator, Erin Capital Management.

I'll refer to the first client as Ellen. Ellen was contacted by Palisades Acquisitions through their diabolical debt collection sub contractor NCO. I am sure many of you have heard of the infamous NCO. They have been sued so many times that it is good material for late night comedy. Anyway the debt was clearly out of statute from an old Providian account going back over 7 1/2 years which Ellen claimed she had paid long ago. Palisades and NCO do not bother with some details as out of statute debt or debt that cannot be validated. Ellen bought my system and I subsequently gave her a lot of email support and also spoke to her on the phone.

Palisades Acquisitions loves to sue people. They figure that most of their marks are too stupid to know how to handle their skullduggery. Unfortunately in many cases they have been right about that. The game is simple, file a suit and go for default judgment because the defendant will not answer the complaint or appear. They are successful with this strategy most of the time. People who own my system or read my blog would never fall for this nonsense.

Ellen purchased my system and the very first thing she did with a bit of email support from me was to send a demand for debt validation (sent certified mail). After doing some research with the help of my user's manual she discovered the subject account which Palisades and NCO claimed was charged off in 2002 was beyond the statute of limitations for open ended accounts (credit cards) in the State of New York where she resided until recently.

Palisades is very clever in how they go about their business. They use a legitimate collection agency to collect the debt instead of doing it themselves thereby making it seem as though they are a creditor. Under the FDCPA they cannot be a creditor but who cares about little details like that, right? NCO acknowledge her demand for validation which did surprise me. Subsequently Ellen received another letter from Palisades Acquisitions stating that they were closing the account and ceasing any further collection efforts.

I will refer to my second client as Jennifer. In 2003 she purchased furniture from nationally known furniture retailer for around $3500.00. This was in March 03. In April the furniture was delivered but she found the order to be defective and refused delivery. At that point she assumed the her account would be credited and the matter would be concluded. This was confirmed by the retailer.

Within 2 months of the rejected delivery Jennifer began receiving bills from the retailer's credit card provider, also a very well known financial services company. She was assured by the furniture store that it would all be taken care of and not to be concerned. As you will see as you read on you should never take anyone's word when it comes to money or a business transaction. Get it in writing so you have recourse.

From 2003 to 2005 the credit card company kept billing Jennifer and tacking on interest to the account. A customer service person at the store told Jennifer in no uncertain terms that they(the retailer) had resolved the matter with the credit card company. Jennifer being a nice person took this person's word. Because Jennifer runs two very different businesses for her living she might have been a little less than hands on with this situation and left to much to chance.

In the summer of 2005 Jennifer was sued for the original debt plus fees and interest on account balance that was not supposed to exist according to the furniture store. After I pieced the whole thing together, I found out that the credit card issuer charged off the debt and sold the account to a 3rd party debt buyer. The problem was upon my further investigation that Jennifer was never served by first class mail or by a marshal. Strange don't you think? The debt buyer naturally obtained a default judgment since Jennifer did not appear or file an answer to the complaint. How could she? She never knew there was one.

In the spring of 2006 the attorneys for the debt buyer filed for a bank execution with which was granted by the court. In August, 2006 $4700.00 was removed from her checking account. How's them for apples? The only thing Jennifer ever saw was the letter from the bank informing her that they had been served with a bank execution and that money was going to be withdrawn from her account.

The problem with Jennifer's situation was that the time allowed for filing of complaints under the FDCPA (Fair Debt Collection Practices Act) and FCRA (Fair Credit Reporting Act) had passed. That would be 1 year from the date of the violation; not 1 year from the date of its discovery unless the intent was malicious.

An attorney advised me that in CT the statute of limitations for filing a civil suit under the civil practice rules was 2 years from the date of the alleged violation. That time frame had passed also. So basically I had no avenues to pursue any solution to help Jennifer get her money back.

So by now you are probably saying "Is this guy ever going to finish this story?" I had to do a lot of thinking regarding if there was any way at all to help Jennifer. I came up with a strategy to try to work on the conscience of the the credit card company. Jennifer gave me a limited power of attorney so that I could be given the details of her account from the furniture company. Upon speaking with them they related that it was their impression that the matter had been taken care of just the way they advised Jennifer.

I let them know just what happened to their customer and explained clearly that they shared some of the blame since they never really followed up with their credit card company. They were kind enough to give me the name of an attorney who worked for the credit card vendor. I called him up and gave the details of Jennifer's nightmare. I explained that his company sold Jennifer's account to a 3rd party debt predator who managed to sue her but not serve her with a summons and complaint and got away with it.

He asked me to send him all of my documentation. A day or so later he called me and said that his company would remove any negative items which they had reported to the credit bureaus on Jennifer's account and that because of the unfortunate circumstances involved that they were willing to compensate Jennifer for the funds that were removed from her account in 2006. They thought that this was the ethical thing to do. I was astounded and speechless. Victory without even firing a shot. Too bad the rest of them are not like this.

I wish everyone a happy and a healthy New Year free of debt and financial worries.

What You Need To Know About The Statute Of Limitations

WHAT YOU ARE ABOUT TO READ COULD SAVE YOUR FINANCIAL LIFE. MOST OF THE TIME CONSUMERS FALL VICTIM TO A DEFAULT JUDGMENT BECAUSE OF THEIR FEAR AND IGNORANCE OF WHAT THEIR LEGAL RIGHTS ARE AND HOW TO DEFEND THEMSELVES AGAINST THOSE WHO ARE WAITING TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THEM.

The statute of limitations is extremely confusing to most people who are dealing with debt collection issues as potential plaintiffs or defendants. I hope in this article to clear up some of that confusion for you. To make it as readable and as simple as possible I am going to breakdown the topic and discuss what the statute of limitations means specific to the Fair Credit Reporting Act, The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, The Federal Trade Commission and finally the individual states.

The Fair Credit Reporting Act

You do not have forever to file a complaint against a debt collector. As some have stated the FCRA is not consumer friendly and the the 2 year time line for a consumer to file a complaint against a subscriber or a credit bureau is prohibitive. The 2 year time line refers to taking the action within 2 years of the violation not when the violation was discovered. The only exception to the 2 year rule according to case precedent is where the violations have been deemed to be willful and intentional violations of the act; not from negligence. To read the actual chapter and verse please go to U.S.C. 1681.

If the complaint against the credit bureau is based on state law violations then the specific state statute of limitations would apply. See what they are right here.

The confusion arises because people confuse the reporting period or how long an account can be reported with the statute of limitations. Let me try to clear this up. The reporting period or the time that the credit bureau is allowed to report a negative account begins on the the "date of last activity" for the specific account i.e., when the last transaction occurred or when it was charged off by the creditor. It is allow to remain on your credit report for 7 years plus 180 days. If a reporting agency keeps it on longer they can be sued but you have to initiate your action within 2 years of the occurrence of the violation. So hopefully you now see the difference between the reporting period and the statute of limitations.

The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act

Many people believe the statute of limitations for credit reporting (7 to 10 years) is the same as the statute of limitations for enforcing debt. Absolutely not. You need to go by each state's specific rules to determine whether a debt you owed or still owe is within the "SOL".

Understanding the differences between the statute of limitation for the FRCA and the FDCPA could potentially save you time in court, stop a default judgment cold and most of all save you thousands of dollars. Third party debt collectors or out of statute debt buyers simply play a numbers game. They are betting that anyone who they try to collect an old debt from is too stupid to know that they legally cannot do so. However if you don't tell the court that the debt is out of statute the judge is certainly not going to take care of the matter for you. You have to appear and defend yourself or have an attorney do it.

I would not say that the FCRA or the FDCPA are particularly consumer friendly. You need to know how to use them as they are. Hopefully in the future they will be amended to be more helpful to the consumer. Although it is self serving I would strongly recommend that you purchase my basic system or my entire kit. Once you are done studying what I have presented therein you will have a thorough understanding of all of these issues. I guarantee it or you may have your money back. Just click on the tab "stopthecallsfast system" for a complete description of what I offer.

FTC Time Barred Debts

The FTC in the memorandum I will link you to here discussed two aspects of time barred debts. The first refers to listing your account under the FCRA. The agency states that after 7 years plus 180 days that negative accounts must be removed. The agency then goes on to discuss when debt collectors cannot sue you. This is guided by the statute of limitations in the state where you reside but the rub is that if a debt collector does illegally sue you you can file a suit in Federal Court against that debt collector if they have sued you on a debt that is past the statute of limitations in your state. If any of this is confusing including what I have written above, please email me at stopthecallsfast@gmail.com with any questions.

They Are Pulling "A Madoff:"

Another Debt Collector Scam

Debt collectors resort to a lot of illegal tricks but the one I am going to tell you about here is really quite creative. It involves the use of IRS form 1099c. The two main culprits in this seem to be Asset Acceptance Corporation and Portfolio Recovery Associates. Both are infamous for being sued with regularity for violations of the FCRA and the FDCPA.

Basically these bottom feeders buy debts for pennies on the dollar that are well past the statutues of limitations in no matter which state you are in. The debts date back to the 1990's. After they buy the debts the amounts are inflated as much as possible and then charged off as losses even though there really is not any loss. 1099c's are then issued to the unsuspecting consumer. So the consumer essentially is getting a tax bill on a debt that is out of statute and which the debt scavenger absolutely has no prayer of verifying (validating the debt as prescribed by the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act).

According to one of the Attorney Generals, if the debt cannot be validated the 1099c cannot be filed. Do you think that is stopping these slime buckets? They are betting that you are an idiot and will just cave in under the pressure and pay or they will try to get some hefty tax deductions on all of the debts on which they are unable to collect.

Should you become a victim of this scam the very first thing you want to do is to serve the debt collectors with my demand for debt validation letter which you can obtain by opting in with your name and email address on by blog. I can promise you right now that they are not going to be able to validate the debt. Once you determine that to be the case you can then proceed to sue their sorry butts.

I recommend going to the National Association of Consumer Advocates (naca.net). They have a listing of qualified attorneys all over the US so it should not be difficult to find a lawyer relatively near where you live.

Not The 10 Commandments But 8 Real Good Ones

We are moving into the holiday season and unfortunately for many people this holiday season is not too joyous. For those of you who are being annoyed by debt collectors or harassed by them I am going to give you the StoptheCallsFast 8 commandments:

I. Never speak to a debt collector unless they are working in house for an original creditor.

II. Never give financial information of any kind to a debt collector. You will be sorry if you do.

III. Always send all correspondence to debt collectors by certified mail-return receipt requested.

IV. Never agree to any terms with a debt collector unless they are in writing and only if the terms are legal and acceptable to you.

V. Never, never, never ignore written correspondence from a debt collector.

VI. Never believe anything a debt collector tells you unless it is in writing and you have had it verified.

VII. Never Accept phone calls from debt collectors.

VIII. Always check your credit reports after any initial communication attempts from debt collectors

You can email me at stopthecallsfast at gmail.com with any questions. Have a Happy Thanksgiving and think of what you are thankful for.

Lessons To Be Learned

I am presently preparing a case for one of my clients who has basically been the victim of multiple violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. This saga started in 2003 when she purchased furniture from a well known furniture retailer. The retailer used GE Money as its credit card servicing agent and still does. The purchase occurred in April, 2003 and the furniture was delivered approximately 4 weeks later.

For purposes of privacy I will refer to my client as Jane. On the date of delivery Jane discovered that the order was incomplete and refused to let the delivery people unload the furniture from the delivery truck. The items were brought back to the retailer's warehouse. The next month Jane received a bill from GE Money. She called the retailer and asked then why this matter was still pending. She was told not to worry about it and that it would be taken care of.

For two years after the furniture was returned GE Money continued to bill Jane. Finally in August of 2005 Jane was told by a customer service representative that the furniture retailer had paid $2433.15 to GE Money which was the entire amount due to GE Money. Jane assumed at that point that the matter was closed. WRONG

On July 27, 2006, Jane received a letter from her bank stating that "A Bank Execution in your name(s) was served on XYZ Bank". You are probably asking yourself "What is going on here?" aren't you? That is what I said to myself when I started reading the paperwork that Jane gave to me.

It took me some days to piece together the pieces of this puzzle. Here is what I came up with. The furniture company acted in good faith and did pay GE the balance in the account. The problem is that GE never credited Jane's account but instead kept charging the account interest. It turns out that GE sold what they considered to be a receivable to a third party debt collector who proceeded to do what many 3rd party debt collectors do to make their money--sue Jane to get a default judgment. Here is where it gets juicy.

Unfortunately for Jane, she never knew that GE sold her account. She also never knew she was sued. It turns out that the 3rd party debt collector sued her not in her state of residence but in some other state. Jane was never served with a summons and complaint. The debt collector obtained a default judgment which was easy since Jane did not appear. Convenient, wasn't it? The default judgment was given to a collection law firm in CT to execute. They requested a bank execution in CT superior CT and it was granted. Mind you, all the while poor Jane had no clue any of these things were happening to her.

There are quite a few issues here which will probably be decided in a court of law. GE Money reported Jane's account as "charged off" to the credit bureaus. We know that this is not true. Here is the first violation of the FCRA. How can you report an account as a charge off or past due when the consumer never owed any money to begin with?

The second issue is that the furniture company informed Jane that the matter was closed and that they had paid the appropriate amount to GE. Apparently GE and the furniture company did not have clear lines of communication. GE sold Jane's account to a 3rd party debt collector. They made the representation to the debt collector that Jane's account was a good receivable and was collectible. Not so.

There is the issue here that Jane was never served a summons and complaint by the party who bought her account from GE. To me it would appear that the default judgment was obtained under questionable circumstances. That is being polite. Then there is the bank execution. In my opinion this represents a theft of funds from Jane's bank account. I think the attorney who is presented with this file is going to have field day.

There is a teachable lesson in all of this which I think may be somewhat clear to you. You cannot assume anything or trust anyone to take care of your financial affairs for you. You have to have your hand on the wheel and check to be sure that what people say they have done is really done. As Ronald Reagan said, "Trust but verify.". "Trust but verify" also means periodically checking all three of your credit reports.

Unethical Practices Commonly Employed By Unethical Debt Collectors

Being Aware of these illegal actions by these unscrupulous people could mean the difference between being sued and paying for a debt that it was illegal to pursue and financial liberation.

1. Filing false or fraudulent affidavits claiming that the affiant has personal knowledge of the records supporting the debt but does not produce said records with the affidavit.

2.Threatening to sue a consumer on a time barred debt

3. Failure to provide a validation notice,15 U.S.C. 1692g

4.Adding unauthorized amounts to debts. This is really one of my very favorite violations. I have seen some outrageous interest charges and fees added to alleged debts.

5. Proceeding with collecting a debt after debt collector has been asked to validate the date but has not complied.

Do any of the above points ring a bell? Have you heard stories from friends, acquaintances or relatives who have had these things happen to them?

It is easy to be taken advantage of or to be cowed into making a deal with these when you don't even have a debt that is legally collectible. How would you know? If you owned my system you would see it right there in my user's manual. People who own my self help system have the weapons to fight back and defeat these dirt bags.

You have nothing to lose but the money you payout to these criminals. I offer 3o day email support and a 30 day money back guarantee so what do you have to lose?

My Economic Recover Package

I see what is happening to millions of people some of whom I know personally; how their personal wealth has been destroyed and how so many of them have lost their jobs. They now have become the prey of rogue, dishonest debt collectors. Where is their bailout package? Where is their TARP? Because of the financial fallout I am witnessing I have made a decision to slash my pricing.

I have decided to make my entire system available at half price for the month of September,2009. What is normally priced at $79.99 will be just $39.99 but only for September. For the very reasonable price of $39.99 you will receive my 6 proven letters used to stop debt collectors, the user's guide, an audio version of the user's guide so you can play it in your car plus the DVD of my October 15,2008 workshop "How To Deal With Debt Collectors".

If you read the news article about me published in ECommerce you will see that I have been there and done that. I know what it feels like not to have two nickels to rub together, to wonder where you are going to be living next month. I did not read about rising from the ashes. I did it! So can you.

A Special Thank You Is In Order

A fellow who publishes a blog known as Value Investor Today has been kind enough to give me some free publicity this weekend. All I can say is thank you so much for taking the time to comment. I am pasting in below what has been written about StoptheCallsFast.Com and me personally.

I recently ran across a sub-par intellect who runs a blog in which he sells snake oil medicine to individuals who try to scam the system. Even though his article was in reference to a company I invest in (ASFI), I found some useful information even from a proponent for not paying your bills.

The blog I’m referencing can be found at:

http://www.stopthecallsfast.com/blog/what-is-the-difference-between-palisades-acquisitions-palisades-collectiions-asta-funding-and-zoe/

Even in spite of the feeble attempt of distorting a company’s facts in order to sell his $79.99 snake oil medicine for the person that wants to avoid paying off debts they’ve racked up, if we take the Philip Fisher Scuttlebutt approach to his article, we may find value in some of it.

In his article, he quoted the following:

“As of today(09/08/09) Asta Funding(Palisades Acquisitions) was
plaintiff of record in 4960 civil actions just in the New York State
Court System data base. Guess how many actions they were listed as
defendant for? 6!!!”

As well as:

“What does that tell you. It tells me that they play their game well and
that those who they sue end up with lots of default judgments. This is
easy money for the Stern family which runs Asta.”

A great deal of information can be ascertained through this statement he makes:

“I have screamed and yelled for a while that these vultures operate with
temerity and arrogance because the penalties for violations of the
FDCPA and the FRCRA are a joke. I don’t see any politicians screaming
and yelling about all these consumer abuses with regard to debts which
are beyond statutes of limitation. I would like to see Chris Dodd,
Charles Schumer, Joe Lieberman, Nancy Pelosi, and others step up to the
plate. I suppose if one has never experienced the threats or harassment
from debt collectors acting illegally or been sued by them it is just a
distant or someone else’s problem.”

In closing, what he’s attempted to do in his article is perpetuate his ideology that people should not pay their debts, regardless if it contributes to the entire mess we’ve seen in the recession that was a direct result of people not paying their obligations. But, in the midst of his babbling, we’ve found that his underlying view of Asta Funding is that of a solid company that benefits from a high rate of success, that never loses its cases in a court of law, rarely gets sued, & the government’s only interest is to let them conduct their business just as they have been doing.

This is proof that even in the worst cases of delusional snake oil sales tactics, scuttlebutt is ascertainable.

Wishing all a fantastic weekend.

I will address each one of his points.Being labeled as someone with inferior intelligence is insulting to say the least but consider the source.. In fact that is a first for me. This person then proceeds who label me as a "snake oil salesman" who sells "snake oil medicine". Really? I was written up in E-Commerce.com last year. You can read the article by clicking on the "News" tab at the top of this page. For someone who has never read any of my letters or examined how my system came to be I find the assertions and accusations he has made to be regrettable.

I have never advocated that those who owe money should not pay their bills. Quite to the contrary. If this person would have read my users manual he would have come to a different conclusion. It is not my problem that he invests in ASFI; it is his problem. This company is notorious for operating on the fringes of what is ethical and legal. One need only read the cases brought against them in various Federal District Courts to see what lengths they go to rape consumers who do not legally owe the subject debts.

My point about the number of lawsuits filed by ASTA/Palisades was in no way meant to impress you with the skills of their legal representatives. My astute friend at Value Investing I am sure has never read any one of these cases. If he did he would quickly learn that the suits are filed with little if any supportive documentation on debts which have not been validated under FDCPA. The resulting default judgments happen because the defendants are either too frightened to ignorant to be able to defend themselves. But I guess it's all okay as long as those who are owners of the common shares of ASTA Funding make a profit, right?

The writer of the blog at Value Investing claims I am perpetuating the ideology that people should not pay their debts. This is ridiculous. If I was a jurist you would label me a strict constructionist not a liberal interpreter of the law. My issue simply put that buyers of old out of statute debt which is purchased for $.04 to $.06, who manufacture false affidavits regarding these debts all the while knowing that that debts are well beyond the statutes of limitation in most if not all states, proceed to threaten, intimidate and sue consumers who are like deer in headlights should not be viewed as ethical and honest business people.

Any reader of this blog article is also invited to read the Boston Globe expose of just how horrid and reprehensible some of the practices employed by slim bucket companies such as ASTA Funding, Palisades Aquisitions, LVNV, Alegis, Collect America, etc. are.

One need only read what Bud Hibbs has written about Asta Funding and Palisades Acquisitions. The next thing I'll read is that the author of Value Investing will be writing to me and telling me that Budd Hibbs does not know what he is talking about. Maybe he'll be accused of hawking snake oil too.

I refer my eminent adversary at Value Investing to the following court cases: Palisades Collection, LLC v Haque,2006 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 4036;235 N.Y.L.J. 71 (Civ. Ct. Queens Co., April13, 2006). (pp.21-23)

Palisades Collection, LLC a/p/o AT&T Wireless v. Gonzalez 10 Misc. 3d 1058A;809 N.Y.S. 2d 482 (N.Y.County Civ. CT. 2005)(Ellen Gesmer J.) p.24

Maybe my friend at Value Investing should have a conversation with Joann Bergmann who has indentified herself as a Vice President in ASTA's Legal Department. She claimed to have knowledge of many of the accounts which were the subject of this litigation but was never able to produce them. She, further was unable to produce copies of the alleged assignments of account in these cases.

Other cases which point out the insufficiency of Plaintiff claims regarding the efficacy of the their claims of "knowing the facts of the accounts" would be:

Unifund CCR Partners v. Harrell, 2005. Super. LEXIS 2037 (August 3,2005) Re failure to produce legitimate affidavits with supporting documentation. It should be noted here that ASTA Funding and Unifund do a lot of business with each other. The Sterns, both father and son know the Zises brothers of Unifund rather well.

So again I wish to thank Value Investing for the comments even though I find them to be insulting. But any publicity is good publicity as far as I am concerned. You are the reader, you be the judge.

Coming next: "Typical Violations In Connection With Debt Collector Litigation"

China could undermine US military power in Pacific: Gates

China could undermine US military power in Pacific: Gates

Shared via AddThis

The Difference Between Palisades Acquisitions And Fredericks Goldsteing & Zoe

Well for starters, New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo has closed down Fredericks, Goldstein and Zoe but forgetting that what differentiates these two entities is the fact that Fredericks threatened to have people arrested, beaten up and to have sexual relations with their spouses or children. Besides the aforementioned Asta Funding or Palisades Acquisitions is no better. Their game is one I have written about before. They buy up debts which are beyond state sol's(statutes of limitation) and or FTC time barred for about $04 to .05 on the dollar and attempt to collect on them. They then pull a real cutesy move and have a "legitimate" collection agency try to suck the money out of the victims.

They use NCO as one of their tools. I have never perceived NCO to be a legitimate collection agency. Just check the various state court dockets.

What is really quite shocking is the fact that Herman Badillo sits on Asta's Board of Directors. I am sure everyone in New York knows the name Herman Badillo. This is disgraceful. It is disgraceful because this guy is in bed with real scum. Asta's game is to manufacture fraudulent affidavits of debt in house with no supporting documents, manufacture statements of account in house and try to pass these documents off as legitimate in courts of law. Guess what? They get away with it. They get away with it because the alleged debtors do not know their rights or how to defend themselves.

As of today(09/08/09) Asta Funding(Palisades Acquisitions) was plaintiff of record in 4960 civil actions just in the New York State Court System data base. Guess how many actions were listed as defendant for? 6!!! What does that tell you. It tells me that they play their game well and that those who they sue end up with lots of default judgments. This is easy money for the Stern family which runs Asta. I suppose it is all okay if you can get up in the morning and look in the mirror and not feel the slightest bit of guilt. After all, it isn't every day that guys like the Sterns and their board members get to be complicit in ruining so many lives and come off like their are ethical and honest business people.

Their attempt at a cloak of respectability is rather touching with their NASDAQ listing. It is like publicly traded shares of what horses dropped in the local stables last night.

I have screamed and yelled for a while that these vultures operate with temerity and arrogance because the penalties for violations of the FDCPA and the FRCRA are a joke. I don't see any politicians screaming and yelling about all these consumer abuses with regard to debts which are beyond statutes of limitation. I would like to see Chris Dodd, Charles Schumer, Joe Lieberman, Nancy Pelosi, and others step up to the plate. I suppose if one has never experienced the threats or harassment from debt collectors acting illegally or been sued by them it is just a distant or someone else's problem.

In a previous article I factored in for inflation and showed you how the $1000 fine for each violation of the FCRA and the FDCPA in the 1970's adjusted for inflation would be more than $5485 today. Why should these debt collectors care about a puny $1000 fine when they are making millions off the backs of people who have no clue as to how to stand up and take control?

I started StoptheCallsFast because of my own experiences with these debt collectors and their brand of financial terrorism. I learned how to take the offense and get rid of them both in court and out of court. That is what my self help system teaches people to do. For the month of September I have slashed my prices in half. What was $79.99 is now only $39.99 but just for September. A small investment which will pay for itself many times over.

When Is Enough Enough?

A reader of my blog, a copy of which appeared on Open Salon commented as follows:
"I received a call back in June about a medical bill that I had not paid to Toledo Hospital for services provided. The person that called me could barely speak English, so I asked them if they were outside the US. I was surprised when the representative, John, told me he was calling from Costa Rica. The collector worked for a company called United Collection Bureau and told me they are contracted by ProMedica Health System to collect for Toledo Hospital.

I asked John to tell me what procedure the bill was for. I was placed on hold and then was amazed to find that they actually had the information. I am in shock that my medical records are being handled in a 3rd world country. I believe this is a violation of the law, but I'm not certain. I was also told that the collection agency, regardless of where they are, should not have access to the actual procedure.

I went online and found a website for United Collection Bureau. There is a list of offices that does not include Costa Rica. I called and asked if they has an office there and was passed around until someone said no. I called back to John's extension and asked him to confirm. He confirmed that he is in Costa Rica and receives his pay from United Collection Bureau. John knew the president of the company’s name, that the company is based in Ohio, and said that he was willing to cooperate because he understood my anger. I was transferred to an American, I believe in Costa Rica, that basically told me to pay my bill or they would send me to legal.

I asked the American woman to give me her name and she hung up. I called John back the next day and he told me he could no longer speak with me; that they had threatened to fire him and he really needs the job.

I'm not out to get a young man working hard in another country fired, so I stopped calling. I did call ProMedica, who claims they had no idea and would investigate. That was back in June. Since then I have received over 20 more calls from people obviously not in America, but unwilling to tell me where they are.

Is this legal?

Deb Webber
August 17,2009"

My question to you Deb would be why are you allowing the phone calls? If this is your debt have they properly validated that fact? Did you ask them in writing by certified mail to validate the debt? If these people are calling you and refusing to properly identify themselves you should serve them with a cease and desist letter my certified mail.

It is a violation of the FDCPA for debt collectors to call you and not properly identify themselves or falsify their identities. Is also a violation for them to refuse to tell you where they are calling from. If you can document any of what you are saying I would suggest contacting the National Association of Consumer Advocates and getting a recommendation for an attorney.

Debt collectors are not permitted to repeatedly call you during any one day. This is also a violation of the FDCPA. For starters I would opt in on the upper right side of this web page and download my validation letter and the audio instructions.

What You Need To Know Is Not Always So Obvious

I get a lot of email and posts about Fredericks, Goldstein & Zoe. The fact is that these low lives are really not the kind of debt collectors you should worry about, that is if you are educated and know your rights. Unfortunately, I have found a lot of people do not know what their rights are when it comes to dealing with debt collectors and this what gets them into major trouble. The debt collectors you need to be wary of are those who use the judicial system to their advantage because they know in many cases or the majority cases that most of you out there don't have a clue about what to do. Their approach is to just flat out sue you.

In this process they are betting that you won't even file an appearance or answer the summons and complaint. A perusal of state judicial websites is replete with numerous legal corpses of consumers who received default judgments because they did not lift a finger to defend themselves. I am in the process of compiling an in depth listing for all of the 50 states and sharing with my readers what resources are available in each state in the event you need to answer a complaint and wish to do so without an attorney.

Even if you use an attorney it is wise to educate yourself on the civil procedures in your respective state. As Jack Ryan said to Captain Ramius in "The Hunt For Red October", "It is wise to know the ways of one's adversary..." Don't you agree? So the question I want to pose is what is the quickest way to figure out the possibility of whether you may or may not be sued?

Certain debt collectors operate without any license so they don't sue anyone. These are shake down artists. The Fredericks firm mentioned above is one such example. But others are quite legal and have registered to conduct business as debt collectors. They may skirt the law but unfortunately they get away with it more often than not.

If a debt collector is threatening to sue you (if they make such statements are just blowing air it is a violation of the FDCPA) there is a quick and easy way to find out if they are suing anyone else or if they have ever sued anyone. I will use New York State's judicial site as the example for purposes of illustration.

Here is a sample for just Bronx County, New York for cases open with Unifund as Plaintiff for just 2009:

As you can see if Unifund says that are going to sue you you had better believe it. The good news is that they cannot validate debts in court. They come up with phoney affidavits, fake statements etc. which is no way satisfy what the courts have defined as validation. See my other blogs. Also please go to the upper right hand corner of this blog opt to download my free validation letter and my audio instructions on how to use it.

So hopefully I have shed some light on some subject matter which I find is troublesome to many. Don't forget to grab my free validation letter and audio and watch for a free checklist which will be available to all of you who sign up (opt in). Until next time.

Understanding The Importance Of Debt Validation

Debt validation if not the most powerful weapon a consumer has against disreputable, unethical debt collection agencies and debt collection attorneys is right up there in the top 3. The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act is very specific about what the definition of "creditor" is. The creditor is the party who loaned you the money in the first instance, not the party who the debt has been assigned to or who has purchased the debt. Under the law the party who has had the debt assigned to it or who has purchased it is defined as a "debt collector". The distinction is important.

A debt collection attorney or a debt collection agency may try to convince you that they are the original creditor. Not true. Creditors are not subject to compliance with the FDCPA but debt collectors are. If the original creditor is attempting to communicate with you it is in your best interest to have the conversation and attempt to reach an accommodation if possible.

Charged off debts (debts written off as losses)by creditors are customarily sold to JDB's (junk debt buyers). This is the tawdry scummy side of the world of debt collection, the place where all the laws are violated and innocent consumers are treated like cattle headed for slaughter. This is the place where all the illegal acts and frivolous lawsuits come from.

These JDB's buy up charged off debts for pennies on the dollar. This is a huge market and very similar to other secondary markets that deal in commodities or junk paper or just plain junk. The strategy used is to try to scare the s..t out of people by using all means of intimidation possible, most of it if not all of illegal.

Understand that when you are making 100's of thousands of dollars and in many cases millions of dollars that fines of $1000 per violation become merely a cost of doing business. Beginning to get the picture? The FDCPA was enacted in 1966 so the fines have not kept up with inflation. What would $1000.00 in 1966 dollars be worth now? $6632.87 if you use the consumer price index and $5281.36 if you use the gdp deflator. Get the picture? Why should these crooks care about breaking the law?

When a debt collector calls you or writes to you they must by law inform you of your right to dispute the subject debt within 5 days of the initial communication. Some do this and some do not but you have to know that this is the law. Disputing the debt means that you never owed this money, you are disputing the amount and or the fees and interest being charged.

Here's the deal. There is a right way and a wrong way to dispute a debt and demand validation. If a debt collector furnishes you with a letter saying that this is your date with your name, an account number and a dollar amount, this does not constitute a validation of the debt. They try to pull this stuff all the time and also come with phony affidavits which are signed by their own employees with no documentation and in house manufactured account statements.

The first thing you do is to go to the post office and grab some certified mail green cards and green and white forms both of which must be filed out and adhered to the mailing envelope. The important thing is to key in the certified mail serial number at the top of the letter you are writing. We'll get the the letter in a minute. Everything you send must always go certified mail because the slime receiving the letter if it is only sent first class will deny receiving it.

In your letter you should reference the debt collector's file number, any account numbers given etc. If the debt is not yours you may start out by stating that fact. Demand from the debt collector what proof they have and can document. This would include account statements, a copy of your original application(signed by you) applying for the account, a contract of sale proving they own this account (notarized), and documents of evidencing the chain of ownership of the account. Your name, an account number, and a dollar amount will not cut it in court.

A new tactic being used by these sociopaths is to just serve you with a summons and complaint without validating the debt hoping you are stupid enough to fold, pay up and not question these blatantly illegal tactics. My attorney buddies tell me and I have also read this statistic that 90% of all the summons and complaints filed end up as default judgments in favor of the debt collectors because the alleged debts do not answer the complaints or show up for court.

If you email me at stopthecallsfast@gmail.com I will be happy to email you a free validation letter with an audio explaining exactly how to use it. You will then be on my subscriber list and be updated on late breaking developments affecting your rights as a consumer with special emphasis on dealing with debt collector abuses. If you have questions about this article please also email me at the above email address or post comments to the blog.

Talk About Pathetic!

On July 7 I received the following comment from an apparently disgruntled reader and an employee of Fredericks, Goldstein & Zoe which I have now approved for posting. Here is the precise quote in CAPS as the author sent it:

"THIS COMPANY, YOU GUYS COMPLAIN ABOUT HAS DONE SO MUCH TO TRY, AND AVOID THESE COMPLAINTS BUT YOU PEOPLE THAT DO NOT WANT TO PAY YOUR BILLS ARE THE PROBLEM, IF THE CURRENT INFORMATION IS NOT RIGHT, THERE JOB IS TO FIND THE DEBTOR, NO WAY AROUND IT, THREATS OF POLICE ACTION THESE JAIL COMMENTS, THESE ARE NOT WHATS GOING ON, I AM HERE EVERY DAY, THEY HAVE FIRED MORE PEOPLE, FOR ANY VIOLATION, YOU BLOGGERS, ARE WHATS THE PROBLEM, YOU SHOULD SEE SOME OF THE CREDIT REPORTS YOU SHOULD HERE WHAT COMES FROM THE OTHER END OF THE PHONE LINE, NEW COMMENTS ON FRI."

Lets examine this ridiculous message. I love the part about how "you people" do not want to pay your bills and the denials about threatening people with jail are certainly not true. I have one lawyer colleague from PA who is suing these slime buckets (see earlier blog) for exactly making these kinds of threats. These losers also call people's relatives and ex spouses. This guy or lady is just hilarious. This sounds like something the Iranian regime would come out with about the West meddling in its electoral process.

What really gets to me is that part about how the people they attack do not want to pay their bills. Well gee whiz if the debt is 10 or 15 years old and Fredericks, Goldstein and Zoe is the 3rd or 4th owner, why should that person pay them anything when they purchased it for say 3 cents on the dollar and it is beyond the statute of limitations for the FCRA and the FDCPA in all 50 states? Can Fredericks Goldstein & Zoe provide any account validation or a chain of ownership on any of these debts that these horrible debtors refuse to pay?

The one thing that consumers do not have to be concerned with is being served with a summons and complaint because Fredericks, Goldstein and Zoe is suing them. They don't sue anyone they just tell those gullible enough to believe them that that is their intention so that they can get as many suckers as possible to pay up. If you are up in Canandaigua, New York you ought to drop by and say hello to them preferably having law enforcement people with you.

If the writer of these objections to the writings of "you bloggers" cares(doubtful) to check out this link to the New York State Attorney General's Office(Andrew Cuomo) he might find some very enligtening reading about the subpoenas which were served recently. It seems lying about what people owe and threatening them with arrest and jail does not sit well with Mr. Cuomo's office.

Here is recent complaint posted on "The Complaints Board" These debt collectors sound like nice folks don't they?

I really must thank Fredericks Goldstein & Zoe. Because of their less than pristine reputation I have received over 1000 views on my website all thanks to them. You really do not have to be too concerned with debt collectors such as the one discussed herein and other thugs like them. If you own my self help "StoptheCallsFast System" you will learn all about how to stop those who seek to steal your hard earned money.

Sears/Citibank South Dakota, NA Part 3

To appreciate the frustration of dealing with bureaucratic stupidity and incompetence you need to first read parts 1 and 2 to really appreciate how big business and specifically large financial institutions succeed in compromising consumers day in and day out. You will recall that this saga began on December 26, 2008 when I went to a Sears Roebuck or a "Sears" store to make some purchases.

I am going to insert the letter from the Comptroller of the Currency which was sent to me on June 10, 2009. Please remember that I first wrote to this agency in February, 2009. Please note when reading this letter how they liberally quote from the letter I received from Citibank,South Dakota, NA to justify their inaction and also their lack of understanding of the issue(s) I am bringing to the table. When reading this letter from the OCC I almost started to believe that they work for Citibank South Dakota, NA.

No one ever disputed the right of a business to retain internal records regarding its dealings with customers for as long it deems practicable. My issue here is twofold. The bank lied about the source of the information used to make its decision as is proven by the recording of the phone call I made to them (See Part 1). They claimed their source was Equifax and solely Equifax. Secondarily, I maintain that there is a serious issue of non disclosure here. If you read the bank's disclosure statement on the credit card application do you see any language that would tell you that the bank is relying on old customer records as much as 30 years old?

Most people including me are walking around thinking that when you apply for a credit card that your credit file is pulled from Equifax, TransUnion or Experian. Reports could come from one of them or all three. We now see that in some instances this is not the case, i.e, that other sources of information are relied on.

The other block buster that the bank is getting away with is their rather liberal use of the term "existing account" If I asked you to define the term existing account for me, what would you say? Please post an answer to this on this blog. As you know the bank has its own definition of "existing account" as you have already read.

Citibank, South Dakota, NA/Sears defines existing account as any account I have now or have had in the past even if it was 20 or 30 years ago and even if the account is closed, the debt has been sold or the debt was discharged in bankruptcy.

If you read this letter from the OCC they state that Sears understands my dissatisfaction regarding the declined application. Again the OCC never read the file carefully as far as I can discern. I did not ask Sears for a credit card. I was going to pay cash;they asked me to apply for one. Additionally I was given the credit card application(hard copy) after being induced to apply for the credit card.

My effort here is to somehow encourage those who make our laws on the state and federal level to force those who grant credit and impact the financial welfare of consumers to treat consumers with respect and dignity; not to confuse them or obfuscate an understanding of the true facts as illustrated I hope by the present case.

When there are too many credit inquiries on your credit report it can lower your FICO score. I believe people who apply for credit accounts, installment accounts or other types of loans have the right to know specifically what information a creditor is going to rely on. The term "other information" which Citibank South Dakota, NA employs is very insufficient in my humble opinion.

I am going to lobby my Congressional representatives and try to be instrumental so that the Fair Credit Reporting Act be amended specifically so that consumers understand that when they make credit applications they know exactly what facts and information about them are being used in when credit decisions are made.

What Sears Does Not Tell You When You Apply For A Credit Card

I was waiting to hear back from the U.S. Comptroller Of The Currency before writing this blogpost. I filed a formal complaint against Citibank South Dakota and Sears in January and Febuary 2009. Gee those people at the Comptroller of the Currency really work fast don't they? Four months to answer a complaint....Wow.

Anyway, I'll try to be as brief as possible while still giving you all of the facts which is more than I can say for my friends at Citibank South Dakota NA and Sears. On December 26, 2008 I went to the Sears retail location in Milford, CT because I needed some essentials and because they always have their best sale the day after Christmas.

I selected my items and proceeded to go to the cashier to pay with my debit card. I do not use retail chain credit cards; I prefer to pay in cash. In the process of paying for my merchandise the woman who was handling my transaction asked me if I wished to apply for a "Sears" credit card. I replied negatively stating that I already had enough credit cards and did not need another one. She then added that I applied I would get another 15% off of my purchase. So I said to myself, "Hey what the hell, I'll get the card and then cut it up but still get the discount here and now". So I told her to go ahead since the discount came to about another $15.00 off of my purchase.

She asked me for my drivers license and social security number. The register then printed out what I though would be the approval of my credit application. To my surprise the lady told me that I would be receiving a letter in the mail and that if I wished to know why I was denied credit that I could call the toll free number which she gave me on the register receipt.

Let us just say that I was standing there in amazement. Coincidentally, just days before I had pulled my Equifax credit report. It had negative information or late pays on it. It was triple A. I also knew that my FICO score was well above 700. So you can see why I may have been very astounded to be denied credit by a "department store".

Upon arriving home I called the toll free number which was answered by Citibank South Dakota NA. I was informed that the reason I was denied credit was because of "an unsatisfactory payment history on an existing account" and that the source of the information was Equifax. The problem is and was that no such information about my credit existed within Equifax's databases. Please hold the term existing account in your memory banks because it will become very important as this story unfolds.

You might say upon hearing this erroneous information regarding why my credit application was denied that I was basically highly agitated, i.e., major league pissed off!. On Saturday morning, December 27, 2008, I called Equifax and was assured by a manager there that no such negative information existed about me within their records. I have in my possession a letter from Equifax which explicitly states this fact.

Talk about going ballistic, I was ready to fire my cruise missiles and Citibank South Dakota and Sears. To compound my angst and frustration I had 3 banking relationships with Citibank, NA and was given a very generous line of credit in one of the accounts 5 months or so prior to receiving the Sears declination.

There is a big distinction between Citibank, NA South Dakota and Citibank, N.A. Please do not confuse the two. The entity with the designation of South Dakota offers credit card services as opposed to the corporate, investment and retail banking activities of Citibank, NA.

After my conversation on Saturday, December 27 with Equifax, I called Citibank, South Dakota, NA. This is when all the fun really started. I had the distinct displeasure of speaking to a Mr. Davis and was treated to some of most rude, arrogant and obnoxious behavior. This individual was enjoying playing God on my dime. He was condescending and spoke to me as though I was some kind of "deadbeat". His attitude was that the credit application was denied and it was basically too bad if I found fault with Citibank South Dakota's credit approval procedures.

I called back Citibank South Dakota, NA and asked for Mr. Davis' supervisor. I was connected to a Ms. Shays who was just the opposite of Mr. Davis. She was factual, helpful and understanding. At this point the situation really started to become interesting.

The bottom line here is the convenient use and definition of terms employed by Sears/Citibank. It should be noted that the people with whom I was conversing at the Citibank location in South Dakota were all former Sears employees.

Remember the term "existing account" mentioned herein? The Sears/Citibank definition of existing account can mean any account that a person has or has had even if said account was closed 20 years ago!! What do you think about that? This was explained to me by Ms. Shays. It so happens that I did have an account with Sears in 1993 and that I did include the account in a bankruptcy which was filed 16 years ago. This is and was the existing account to which they were referring. How's them for apples?

What was revealed to me within days of my conversation with Mr. Davis by his Manager, Ms. Shays was that within a year and some months prior to my making a solicited credit application to Sears that the Sears credit card operations were sold to Citibank, South Dakota, NA.

So in my opinion what we have here is the rather elastic and make it what you will use of the term "existing account" by the former employees of Sears who now work for Citibank South Dakota, NA. The problem is that Citibank and Citibank South Dakota, NA never had any problem with giving me credit. Doesn't it appear as if one hand does not know what the other is doing here?

Most people believe and are sure that under the Fair Credit Reporting Act tha negative information with the exclusion of bankruptcies must be removed from all of your credit reports after 7 years plus 180 days have passed. So if you go to apply for credit after the 7 1/2 years you would assume that all negative information which may have appeared about you before that time clock started ticking would be gone. That is true and accurate. What does not go away is internal records which businesses have about you and which may be as old as 20, 30 or 40 years.

This is the information which Sears Citibank was using. The only problem in my opinion is that although they have the legal right to use internal information that they must be legally bound to disclose to a prospective credit applicant that their are utilizing said information prior to the credit application being signed not after it is signed.

The other issue is how evasive and obfuscatory they were about finally disclosing the real reason for the decision not to give me a Sears credit card. I am going to share with you the exact wording in the Sears credit application the hard copy of which was given to me by the cashier after I applied for credit not before.

The pertinent language is as follows:

"Personal Information We Collect and May Disclose

The personal information we collect about you comes from the following sources:

• Information we receive from you, such as your name,address,and telephone number,
• Information about your transactions,such as your account balances,payment history, and account activity and
• Information we receive from consumer reporting agencies and other sources, such as your credit bureau reports and other information relating to your creditworthiness.

we may disclose any of the above information that we collect to affiliates and nonaffiliated third parties as described below.

The term "personal information," as used in this notice, means information that identifies you personally.We may use information which does not personally identify you to help manage our businesses and to provide us, our affiliates, and other companies insight into consumer spending behavior. We may do htis even if you ask us to limit disclosure of personal information about, as described in the Privacy Choices Form that you receive with your credit card."

I apologize for the wordiness of the relevant language but as you can see there is no reference to what Sears specifically uses to make a credit determination. The Fair Credit Reporting Act does not cover what business can and cannot do with their internal records. Upon first glance I found the language they use to be evasive, misleading and very non specific.

So what is my object in sharing all of this with you? In January of this year I shared my entire file with the CT Attorney General's Office, the Head of the Senate Banking Committee, Senator Chris Dodd and the U.S. Comptroller of the Currency. My goal is to have the Fair Credit Reporting Act amended to encompass what I view in the case presented here as being one of another way to abuse consumers. Surely 999 out of 1000 people applying for credit at Sears would never think that accounts they had 15,20 or 30 years ago would be taken account when decisions were to be made on their credit applications.

When you are denied credit it negatively impacts your FICO score. For some people this could be very harmful to their financial health. Stay tuned for to read about the Sears/Citibank written response, what the U.S. Comptroller of the Currency and the Office of Senator Christopher Dodd have done to be helpful (NOT).

The Anatomy Of A Debt Collector Lawsuit

On March 30 of this year I published a blog entitled "Debt Collectors Who Will Sue You". Well how about I turn the tables and sue one of them? Yes, that is correct Robert L. Friedman will soon be suing a well known slime ball debt collector firm for violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. You need to know all about this so when its your turn to get them you can come out with guns blazing.

In March,2008 I received a "Settlement Offer" on an account [date] which was erroneously attributed to me with the original creditor listed as GE/Exxon. Emmmmm, I did know that GE and Exxon merged, did you? Anyway the letter claimed I owed a current balance of $400.00 but they were willing to settle for $200.30. I don't know where the $.30 came from. The sender of this correspondence was an entity we'll call "ABC Debt Collector" and they're collecting for the current owner of the account which is a conglomerate of debt buyers and collectors that I believe is part of or owned by the Sherman group of collectors.

I called ABC Debt Collector after getting their letter and asked who owned the company and what their mailing address was. The half literate person on the other end of the phone refused to give me this information. It was not until I demanded to speak to her supervisor that she complied.

Within days of receiving the letter from ABC Debt Collector I sent a cease and desist letter via [replied with] certified mail (one of which I use in my STCF System). In the letter I explained that I had no knowledge of this debt and that they should immediately comply with the law, not to have any further contact with me, and to be sure that this fictitious debt was not reported to any of the credit bureaus.

I should also mention that copies of this letter also went to the Ohio State Attorney General's Office because that is where the collector has an office as well as the Attorney General for Connecticut, Richard Blumenthal. It's always a smart move to Cc: attorneys general and even the Federal Trade Commission. Even if these parties do not move on your complaint it is then harder for the debt collector criminals to claim that they never received your cease and desist letter or to ignore it. Further, in my experience and in the experience of my attorney, the more complaints these agencies get the more aware they are of the epidemic problem of debt collection harassment. Because of a lack of resources, they may not investigate your one complaint, but if everyone who is harassed makes a complaint, they are more likely to take action against these collectors.

In response to my cease and desist letter, On March 21, 2008 I received a letter from ABC Debt Collector advising me that they"....have stopped collecting on this account and [nad] have returned your account to the creditor listed above." At that point I figured I was done with them. NOT!!!!!!

On May 2 of this year I received another "Settlement Offer" from ABC Debt Collector . On the same account! This time they claimed I owed $442.14 to GE/Exxon but were willing to settle for $221.07. How big of them:-). They also added the name of one of collection companies that is part of the conglomerate [sub companies of their client] as now being the [original] "current" creditor. I suppose I was supposed to be moved by this.

Since helping people deal with debt collectors and weeding out their unfair and deceptive tactics [the subject matter here] is my business, I started salivating and licking my chops. I thought to myself that I would have no problem taking money from these morons for law violations. I consulted with Attorney Sarah Poriss , who regularly brings suit against debt collectors and who defends people being sued on old credit card debt, and who I have previously mentioned on this blog. [and] She believed the debt collector had already violated the FDCPA because they promised me a year ago that they would close the account and stop collecting, and here they were trying to get money from me again. There is a provision of the FDCPA that states that if the consumer notifies the debt collector in writing that the consumer refuses to pay the debt, the collector must cease attempts to collect the debt. Her advice to me was to send them a certifed letter stating that I refuse to pay the subject debt.
The object of this exercise was to see if they knew that they were required to cease attempts to collect since I informed them in writing that I refused to pay the debt under the FDCPA. No such luck. I holstered my weapon. But wait till you hear what happened next.

Thirteen days later I received a letter from ABC Debt Collector stating that they have stopped collecting on the subject debt, returned the collection account to their client and if they reported the account to the "credit repositories" they would request that the account(s) be deleted from my credit report. OK, I guess they can do that.

But at the end of May I received another letter- but this time from ABC Debt Collector's parent company confirming that I would receive no further communications on the subject account. They also included a paltry, pathetic attempt to insinuate that they are validating the account and which claimed that the validation verifies the debt. I have discussed validation on this blog previously and if you have read some of my [p]articles you know that validation of an account means presenting proof that the debtor applied for the account, used the account, with supporting documentation; not a phony affidavit or an in house generated account statement. Wow, I did not even rate any of that fraudulent stuff. These bozos just sent a printed letter titled "Validation of Debt" which stated that the account was acquired from another sleaze ball debt collection outfit and that it was now owned by the present sleaze ball debt collector. No documents, no copies of anything. I guess they expect that their word is compelling enough.

Oh well my attorney now has this matter in her very capable hands.

Fredericks, Goldstein & Zoe

If you receive any communication from a debt collector firm operating under the name of Frederick Goldstein & Zoe be forewarned. These people are the lowest form of sewer filth of septic waste that you can imagine. I kid you not. There is no hyperbole or fantasy here. I have been receiving numerous comments to my blog and emails asking me who "Frederick Goldstein & Zoe" is. My friends you really do not want to know these people.

You need to learn how to defend yourself and not ignore the phone calls or letters you receive. Ignoring debt collectors could be fatal to your financial health. They will sue you if you cower or do not take the initiative and attack. You should at least purchase my self help system and learn the ropes. Is an investment of $148.00 worth it if you can save thousands. Or you can ignore these animals and be sued and then hire a good attorney. The choice is yours. Just click on "Buy STCF Kit" on the menu bar at the top of this page.

Here is what one woman emailed to me:

"I have also recieved calls from Frederick, Goldstein and Zoe. They have called my ex husband and his mother and threated them with having me arrested, papers to be delivered at their work and lawsuits. I contacted them and requested an address to send a letter and they refused to give me an address, e-mail and then were rude to me. How can I find out an address to send a certified letter if they refuse to give me one? I called them back after they hung up on me and still could not get a supervisor. They are calling ex-relatives and I never had the bill that they referenced. Now they are calling my work and threatening my employees who answer the phone."

Fredericks Goldstein & Zoe does not like to give out its mailing address so here it is: Fredericks Goldstein & Zoe, 44 Bristol St., Canandaigua, N.Y. 14424. toll free:1-866-949-9434

I am inserting a link to the complaint filed by Attorney Jason Rapa against Frederick Goldstein And Zoe
for your reading pleasure
:http://www.stopthecallsfast.com/blog/Walck v. Frederick Goldstein & Zoe.pdf

There should be an amendment to the Bill Of Rights in our Constitution which basically should state that people who owe money or
who have fallen on hard times should be treated with respect and and not prey upon by those who are so dishonest and unscrupulous
that they would sacrifice their own mothers for gain. Are you listening Frederick Goldstein?

IED's Used By Debt Collectors

My reference to IED's in the title of this blog may have caught you off balance. Yes, I am referring to improvised explosive devices commonly used by terrorists and/or insurgents in Iraq and Afganistan. Well the debt collector equivalent of IED's would be some of the illegal strategies employed by some of the more infamous debt collectors. Specifically I'll be talking you about how they file boilerplate affidavits that they know are fictiticious, filing phony contracts of or bills of sale without your name or account on and alleging that they bought your account, sending legal filings against you knowingly to a bad address and changing the date of last of activity on your credit reports so that they can try to sue you within the statute of limitations.

Phony Affidavits

This has been perfected to the point of almost being an art form by such notable debt collectors as Worldwide Asset Purchasing, LVNV, Unifund just to name a few. Typically a low level employee of the debt collector affirms that he or she is familiar with the circumstances surrounding the account in question and has access to all of the pertinent agreements, transactions records and statements for said account. The only problem is that the supporting documentation is not included with the affidavit in the summons and complaint filed by the debt collector's legal counsel because there is no documentation.

The very sad part of it is that consumers who do not know their rights, who don't know how to defend themselves or who do not get an attorney end up with default judgments. I am providing the link to a white paper provided by some very excellent attorneys just click here to read more. The courts do not know fraudulent affidavits have been filed unless you the defendant tell them.

Statements Manufactured By Old Debt Buyers Just Using A Desktop Computer

Recently one of my friends was sued by Worldwide Asset Purchasing. Their attorneys filed a motion for default judgment with the Superior Court in New Haven, CT. Included in the papers filed was a boilerplate affidavit and contracts of sale showing the 3 different times the alleged account of my friend had been bought and sold. What was bizarre and astounding about these "legal documents", I use that term with tongue in cheek, is that none of these contracts or bills of sale had any letterhead, any notary seal, any witnesses but just some barely legible signature at the bottom of someone representing themselves as a vice president or some sort of financial officer.

The scary part of the aforementioned is that these people get away with this stuff because consumers (debtors) are intimidated by this boilerplate garbage and have no idea of what their rights are. My purpose of my business is of course to earn a living but primarily I seek to educate consumers through my proven self help system how they can defend themselves against these white collar criminals and learn to take the offensive. Anyone can click on the tab on the menu bar on my blog to learn how they can purchase my system and what they get for their money.

Changing The Date Of Last Activity

I think you should about the recent case showing just how insidious and nefarious the practice of altering the date of last activity is. I am refering to Mary Jo Barnett, John Allen Brookins, and Dewey Jack Crossland, Individually And On Behalf Of All Others Simarly Situated v. Unifund Corp. Just click on the emboldened case and you will be taken to the pdf file. This makes great reading. Unifund is owned by the Zises Brothers who are well known for their chicanery. The court in this case mandated that Experian must cooperate with Unifund in correcting the dates it altered on consumer credit reports.

Another important case is Heather Gillespie And Angela Cinson v. Equifax Information Services, L.L.C. By clicking this case reference you read about the shenanigans Equifax pulled the key part of the decision is this:

"...We conclude that the consumer
reporting agency must do more than simply make an
accurate disclosure of the information in the consumer’s
credit file. The disclosure must be made in a manner
sufficient to allow the consumer to compare the disclosed
information from the credit file against the consumer’s
personal information in order to allow the consumer to
determine the accuracy of the information set forth in her
credit file. In writing § 1681g(a)(1), Congress requires
disclosure that is both “clearly and accurately” made. An
accurate disclosure of unclear information defeats the
consumer’s ability to review the credit file, eliminating a
consumer protection procedure established by Congress
under the FCRA. ..."

The Circuit Court concluded that the disclosures were unclear because “[t]he Date of Last Activity field is used for different purposes within Equifax’s file” because it discloses dates for current accounts, delinquent accounts, and delinquent accounts for which additional payments have been made but which are still in default. Gillespie, at 941-42. But the Court was more concerned with the fact that the manner in which the Date of Last Activity was calculated “could effectively allow Equifax the opportunity to keep delinquent accounts in the credit file past the seven and one-half year limitation” in the FCRA because any intervening payment by the consumer resets the last activity date. Id., at 942. The Seventh Circuit found this particularly troubling because Equifax had access to the “date the first major delinquency was reported” but failed to disclose that information to consumers.

So in conclusion I have tried to highlight some of the worst things that old debt buyers keep in their bag of tricks to sacrifice you on the altar of fnancial security. To be well informed is to be well armed. I wish everyone a safe and fund filled Memorial Day weekend.

Maybe The Worst Collection Agency In The United States

Maybe The Worst Collection Agency In The U.S.

Remember the name Unifund. If you ever receive mail from them or a phone call from them..watch out!

What I have learned is that Unifund is owned by the infamous Zises brothers who founded Integrated

Resources and royally screwed investors back the 1980’s. What follows is what Bud Hibbs of

www.budhibbs.com thinks of these slime buckets:

“David Rosenberg, Cincinnati, OH and the Unifund (UNIFRAUD?) Group is arguably one of the worst debt collectors that have EVER come on the scene.

He happily admits to paying 3-4 cents on the dollar to purchase old (usually worthless) debts from creditors, gambling that he can turn them into big profits. Rosenberg's operation is enough to cause consumers to be leery of Unifund collection activities. Challenge every contact from Unifund. Unifund does not ask credit card companies for copies of their card holder agreements. They have copies of the form agreements in their Files. However, they have no way of establishing which form was sent to which cardholder when. Their in-house signor of affidavits; Angela Freckman swears to have knowledge on purchased debts that are used in court filings. Again, CHALLENGE everything from these bottom feeders, they are NOT to be believed or trusted.

Rosenberg’s history is to file claims that are hearsay using a group of attorneys who would rather skip a court date in the hope of obtaining a default judgment. Unifund was reportedly selling ‘future home liens’ to other bottom feeders at a conference, how low does that rank in the sleaze category? The good news is that most Unifund cases can be defeated if you have proper legal representation from attorneys who know how to handle this assembly line of bogus pleadings and manufactured affidavits. It ain’t brain surgery to beat up on a bottom feeder, you just need to know what steps to take. Challenge everything about them, including anything they place on your credit files., let us assist you in defeating their con game.”

It gets better. One of my blog readers sent me the following information:

"Better yet, all three sons [Zises brothers] are the founding principles of Unifund CCR partners, a vicious collection agency. This year, Unifund will sue 160,000 families for credit card debt. Many families will be sued for cards they never owned. Even more will be sued, and never know about it until their wages are garnished, their bank account is cleaned out or the Sheriff sells the family home. This is an exceptionally profitable business. A face value account of say $8000 can be bought for less than $400, and yield a default judgment in excess of $20,000. And, since the tax laws treat purchased debit proceeds the same as loss recovery mitigation, the profits are mostly not reportable and tax free! Woopie!!!!

The industry is full of illegal activity all the way up to the corporate management level. Unifund has a contract with Asta Funding a.k.a. Palisades Collections that rewards Unifund CCR Partners with a premium commission for collecting "...outside the relative statute of limitations". I am sure the Zises Brothers have multiple offshore accounts in the Cayman Islands, Jersey, Isle of Man, Isle of White and various South China Sea banks. They must be using their accounts with the Israeli Discount Bank on 5th avenue, which has a branch in the Cayman Islands, as a vehicle to get the unreported Unifund proceeds out of the country."

If you are being contacted by Unifund, email me, or purchase my STCF system.

If you ignore their correspondence you are going to need an attorney.

Telling Debt Collectors Too Much Can Get You Into A Lot Of Trouble

In past blogs I have written extensively about the do's and don'ts of dealing with debt collectors. In my experience most debt collectors are not much better than what the septic man extricates from your septic tank periodically. My StoptheCallsFast.Com system was developed because my own financial issues some years ago. It is true in my case that necessity was the mother of invention. The first cardinal rule I learned was that you never talk to debt collectors about anything on the phone and that is how my letter #1 in my 6 letter system was developed. It's really common sense. You just don't have conversations with these morons. I am sure some of you watched the NBC Dateline expose of what debt collectors try to do to people who have their guard down.

I have the privilege of knowing an attorney in the Hartford, CT area whose name is Sarah Poriss. Sarah was referred to me by a legal colleague of hers who I also admire. Sarah is a true consumer advocate and has devoted her legal practice to defending consumers against legal actions brought by credit card companies and debt collectors. As Sarah states on her website: "Since very few consumers understand the process of being sued on a debt, they are overwhelmed and feel outnumbered. However, once a client hires me, I even the odds by making the other side follow the rules, and getting their cases dismissed when they fail to."

Below you can read Sarah's summary of a case she just concluded and won. I could have helped Sarah's client before she divulged too much to the debt predator over the phone. After the client did that she definitely needed an attorney and a good one like Sarah is.

"Debt collector contacts consumer at work. Consumer tells collector she cannot take personal calls at work. Collector then threatens to have papers served on her at work and states he will contact her human resources department and have her pay attached.
Out of fear that this will happen, she agrees to make two large lump sum payments to settle the debt. She of course did not have the money, was planning on borrowing from her 401(k), which she did not have to do and should never do. About two weeks later, at least one week before the collector was going to debit the first payment from her checking account, she calls the collector to inform them that she will not be making the payments and instructs the collector not to try to take the money from her account. Nevertheless, the collector attempted to take the funds on the previously agreed upon date.

When the collector did not get the money, he started calling at least four other people at the consumer's workplace. When she told him he can't call other people, he said he could so long as he didn't tell them about the debt. This is of course false; collectors may make one call only to third parties but only to ascertain location information on the consumer. At this point, the collector also threatened to have her "served" by the local sheriff, stating that she had "bounced a check across state lines" when the money wasn't in her account.
The collector had no intention of serving the consumer with anything, because it did not have the current right to bring suit against her. The statement that she had bounced a check was an implication that she had committed a crime, which is unlawful. The collector also could not legally have her human resources attach her pay as there was no right to take her pay. I believe the calls to the other employees were to scare my client into paying-if she had to pay to get the calls to stop and preserve her job, she probably would have been driven to that point.
I brought suit and the collector quickly contacted me, informed me that the individual collectors who had perpetrated these threats and false statements had been fired, and offered to settle for a fairly generous sum for this kind of case."

For a free consultation you can call Sarah Poriss at 860-593-1758 or send an email to: info@sarahporiss.com