Input: I agree with MER. I have experience as a debtor, pro-bono attorney and debt collector. You can' t expect collectors to be judge or jury. The cease communication right is meant to to force the collector to sue or go away.

I agree with MER.

You can' t expect collectors to be judge or jury.

The cease communication right is meant to to force the collector to sue or go away.

I have experience as a debtor, pro-bono attorney and debt collector.


Input: Dear CFPB: I hope you will separate the comments about debt buyers from those about debt collection in general. This is another area where you should throw the book at collectors telling deliberate lies or misrepresentations. On the other hand, there are too many federal suits brought by consumers who were not misled but who allege that the least sophisticated consumer might have been misled by a letter written in good faith. The only ones who benefit are attorneys. The CFPB has power under UDAAP in addition to the FDCPA to punish liars. They should use it. Collectors, who are just lay people in most cases should not be held to a strict liability standard. Punish bad actors but restore reasonableness to the act.

Dear CFPB: I hope you will separate the comments about debt buyers from those about debt collection in general.

On the other hand, there are too many federal suits brought by consumers who were not misled but who allege that the least sophisticated consumer might have been misled by a letter written in good faith.

The only ones who benefit are attorneys.

This is another area where you should throw the book at collectors telling deliberate lies or misrepresentations.

They should use it.

Collectors, who are just lay people in most cases should not be held to a strict liability standard.

Punish bad actors but

restore reasonableness to the act.

The CFPB has power under UDAAP in addition to the FDCPA to punish liars.


Input: Honest, respectful and open communication between consumers and collectors should be the goal. If there are too many roadblocks to making contact with a debtor, more consumers will find negative information on their credit reports and have more lawsuits filed against them. Rule number 1 strikes the right balance. If the consumer responds, the consumer will receive the mini-miranda disclosure and information about the debt. If the named person is not at the number, is it really so awful to call the collector and let them know? If calls contiue after that point from the same collector, then there should be penalties. Professional collectors do not want to waste time calling a wrong number.

Honest, respectful and open communication between consumers and collectors should be the goal.

If calls contiue after that point from the same collector, then there should be penalties.

If there are too many roadblocks to making contact with a debtor, more consumers will find negative information on their credit reports and have more lawsuits filed against them.

Rule number 1 strikes the right balance.

If the consumer responds, the consumer will receive the mini-miranda disclosure and information about the debt.

If the named person is not at the number, is it really so awful to call the collector and let them know?

Professional collectors do not want to waste time calling a wrong number.

Honest, respectful and open communication between consumers and collectors should be the goal.

If there are too many roadblocks to making contact with a debtor, more consumers will find negative information on their credit reports and have more lawsuits filed against them.


Input: I do not think collectors would mind reimbursing consumers who are charged per call or per message. Add $5 for the hassle of getting the refund. Collectors should have a way to make contact with consumers who choose not to have a flat-rate telephone service. Honest, respectful and open communication by all parties is the key to giving consumers enough information to identify and understand debts and come to workable resolutions for legitimate debts. It is also the key to stopping calls to wrong numbers. Collectors who are not honest and respectful should be fined or lose their right to be licensed.

I do not think collectors would mind reimbursing consumers who are charged per call or per message.

Honest, respectful and open communication by all parties is the key to giving consumers enough information to identify and understand debts and come to workable resolutions for legitimate debts.

It is also the key to stopping calls to wrong numbers.

Add $5 for the hassle of getting the refund.

Collectors should have a way to make contact with consumers who choose not to have a flat-rate telephone service.

Collectors who are not honest and respectful should be fined or lose their right to be licensed.

Add $5 for the hassle of getting the refund.

I do not think collectors would mind reimbursing consumers who are charged per call or per message.

Collectors should have a way to make contact with consumers who choose not to have a flat-rate telephone service.

Honest, respectful and open communication by all parties is the key to giving consumers enough information to identify and understand debts and come to workable resolutions for legitimate debts.

Collectors who are not honest and respectful should be fined or lose their right to be licensed.

Honest, respectful and open communication by all parties is the key to giving consumers enough information to identify and understand debts and come to workable resolutions for legitimate debts.

Collectors who are not honest and respectful should be fined or lose their right to be licensed.

It is also the key to stopping calls to wrong numbers.


Input: My experience has been that people younger than I (a boomer) prefer to communicate electronically (emails, texts & chats). I know that when I was deeply in debt, I would have preferred not to have to speak to a real person. There is a legitimate concern about unencrypted email or the potential for consumers not to consider that others may have access to their email. However, in general, we should encourage communication, however that happens-especially if it is in a form preferred by a particular consumer. I believe that emails, chats & texts should all be considered writings. I don' t know how you include all disclosures unless you direct someone to a place where they can read them in plain english.

My experience has been that people younger than I (a boomer) prefer to communicate electronically (emails, texts & chats).

I know that when I was deeply in debt, I would have preferred not to have to speak to a real person.

There is a legitimate concern about unencrypted email or the potential for consumers not to consider that others may have access to their email.

I don' t know how you include all disclosures unless you direct someone to a place where they can read them in plain english.

However, in general, we should encourage communication, however that happens-especially if it is in a form preferred by a particular consumer.

I believe that emails, chats & texts should all be considered writings.


Input: The Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 (TCPA) was passed by the United States Congress in 1991 and signed into law by President George H. W. Bush as Public Law 102-243. It amended the Communications Act of 1934. The TCPA is codified as 47 U. S. C. 227. The TCPA restricts telephone solicitations (i. e., telemarketing) and the use of automated telephone equipment. The TCPA limits the use of automatic dialing systems, artificial or prerecorded voice messages, SMS text messages, and fax machines. It also specifies several technical requirements for fax machines, autodialers, and voice messaging systems " principally with provisions requiring identification and contact information of the entity using the device to be contained in the message.

The Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 (TCPA) was passed by the United States Congress in 1991 and signed into law by President George H. W. Bush as Public Law 102-243.

It amended the Communications Act of 1934.

The TCPA is codified as 47 U. S. C. 227.

The TCPA restricts telephone solicitations (i. e., telemarketing) and the use of automated telephone equipment.

The TCPA limits the use of automatic dialing systems, artificial or prerecorded voice messages, SMS text messages, and fax machines.

It also specifies several technical requirements for fax machines, autodialers, and voice messaging systems " principally with provisions requiring identification and contact information of the entity using the device to be contained in the message.


Input: I believe that some collection agencies attempt to coerce payment in order to reset the clock on debts that would otherwise be time-barred. The real issue here however is one of proper record keeping. The collection agencies may not be fully sure if the debt is time barred or not simply because it has passed hands several times. A transcript or log should be available to consumers upon request (at a minimum) showing when, where and who held the collection.

I believe that some collection agencies attempt to coerce payment in order to reset the clock on debts that would otherwise be time-barred.

The real issue here however is one of proper record keeping.

The collection agencies may not be fully sure if the debt is time barred or not

simply because it has passed hands several times.

A transcript or log should be available to consumers upon request (at a minimum) showing when, where and who held the collection.

The real issue here however is one of proper record keeping.

The collection agencies may not be fully sure if the debt is time barred or not

The collection agencies may not be fully sure if the debt is time barred or not

simply because it has passed hands several times.

A transcript or log should be available to consumers upon request (at a minimum) showing when, where and who held the collection.

The real issue here however is one of proper record keeping.

A transcript or log should be available to consumers upon request (at a minimum) showing when, where and who held the collection.

The collection agencies may not be fully sure if the debt is time barred or not


Input: Partial payments should NOT revive the debt. The original lender or the agencies working on their behalf have more than reasonable time to collect on an outstanding amount owed. We have rules in place on both collecting debts and on reporting them and partial payment on a debt should not circumvent those rules.

Partial payments should NOT revive the debt.

and partial payment on a debt should not circumvent those rules.

The original lender or the agencies working on their behalf have more than reasonable time to collect on an outstanding amount owed.

We have rules in place on both collecting debts and on reporting them

Partial payments should NOT revive the debt.

The original lender or the agencies working on their behalf have more than reasonable time to collect on an outstanding amount owed.

Partial payments should NOT revive the debt.

We have rules in place on both collecting debts and on reporting them

Partial payments should NOT revive the debt.

and partial payment on a debt should not circumvent those rules.


Input: I believe Amex handles this the best. The account holder is liable for all charges made by themselves and any authorized users added to the account. Authorized Users however are given a unique card number and can be held accountable for any charges they make.

I believe Amex handles this the best.

The account holder is liable for all charges made by themselves and any authorized users added to the account.

Authorized Users however are given a unique card number and can be held accountable for any charges they make.

I believe Amex handles this the best.

The account holder is liable for all charges made by themselves and any authorized users added to the account.

I believe Amex handles this the best.

Authorized Users however are given a unique card number and can be held accountable for any charges they make.


Input: Email: Yes so long as it is not a " blind " email attempt at reaching an individual as it may reach the incorrect party (first. lastname @company. com when it should be first. lastname1 @company. comThe down side to this is the inevitable fishing attacks by scammers. Email should therefore be limited to times when the consumer initiates it or formally lists their email with the 3 major reporting agencies as a method of initial contact.

Email: Yes so long as it is not a " blind " email attempt at reaching an individual

The down side to this is the inevitable fishing attacks by scammers.

as it may reach the incorrect party (first. lastname @company. com when it should be first. lastname1 @company. comThe

Email should therefore be limited to times when the consumer initiates it or formally lists their email with the 3 major reporting agencies as a method of initial contact.

Email: Yes so long as it is not a " blind " email attempt at reaching an individual

as it may reach the incorrect party (first. lastname @company. com when it should be first. lastname1 @company. comThe

Email should therefore be limited to times when the consumer initiates it or formally lists their email with the 3 major reporting agencies as a method of initial contact.

The down side to this is the inevitable fishing attacks by scammers.


Input: Texts: No, text messaging and cell phones should be prohibited as there is not a viable means for the consumer to record the text and bring it into court as documentation if needed. All the issues raised about collectors calling the wrong individual or family members would be 100x worse with texting.

Texts: No, text messaging and cell phones should be prohibited

as there is not a viable means for the consumer to record the text and bring it into court as documentation if needed.

All the issues raised about collectors calling the wrong individual or family members would be 100x worse with texting.

Texts: No, text messaging and cell phones should be prohibited

as there is not a viable means for the consumer to record the text and bring it into court as documentation if needed.

Texts: No, text messaging and cell phones should be prohibited

All the issues raised about collectors calling the wrong individual or family members would be 100x worse with texting.


Input: Social Media: While the courts have made the rare exception for use of social media as a means of giving notice, not everyone is on every social media platform. I am very internet savy yet I am not on foursquare, pinterest and several others. On FB, Twitter and others there are several thousand people with my name who may get incorrectly notified.

Social Media: While the courts have made the rare exception for use of social media as a means of giving notice,

not everyone is on every social media platform.

On FB, Twitter and others there are several thousand people with my name who may get incorrectly notified.

I am very internet savy yet I am not on foursquare, pinterest and several others.

Social Media: While the courts have made the rare exception for use of social media as a means of giving notice,

I am very internet savy yet I am not on foursquare, pinterest and several others.


Input: Collection email should not be sent to a consumers work place email address. As I stated earlier, email communication should be consumer initiated at this time unless the consumer specifically opts to list an email address of record with the 3 major credit reporting agencies.

Collection email should not be sent to a consumers work place email address.

As I stated earlier, email communication should be consumer initiated at this time unless the consumer specifically opts to list an email address of record with the 3 major credit reporting agencies.


Input: Email correspondences from a company or collection agency should list the state they are registered in and the registration number for consumer validation purposes. There is way to many scam emails to possibly think an email from a collector would be valid.

Email correspondences from a company or collection agency should list the state they are registered in and the registration number for consumer validation purposes.

There is way to many scam emails to possibly think an email from a collector would be valid.

Email correspondences from a company or collection agency should list the state they are registered in and the registration number for consumer validation purposes.

There is way to many scam emails to possibly think an email from a collector would be valid.


Input: Off the top, I believe NYC has similar laws where business are not allowed to charge extra for the use of credit cards however it seems online payments to the city (taxes, water bill, traffic ticket, etc) using a credit card are still assessed a processing fee. It seems NYC itself is confused about this.

Off the top, I believe NYC has similar laws where business are not allowed to charge extra for the use of credit cards

however it seems online payments to the city (taxes, water bill, traffic ticket, etc) using a credit card are still assessed a processing fee.

It seems NYC itself is confused about this.

It seems NYC itself is confused about this.

Off the top, I believe NYC has similar laws where business are not allowed to charge extra for the use of credit cards

It seems NYC itself is confused about this.

however it seems online payments to the city (taxes, water bill, traffic ticket, etc) using a credit card are still assessed a processing fee.


Input: Collectors should be barred from stating that payment of a debt will definitively improve a consumers credit score as FICO (the industry standard) uses proprietary algorithm that the collection agent cannot possibly guess at. Yes, a collection agent, in good faith negotiation for resolution of the alleged debt should be able to remove the collection trade line from the consumers credit reports which should be stipulated in a binding settlement agreement signed by both parties.

Collectors should be barred from stating that payment of a debt will definitively improve a consumers credit score

Yes, a collection agent, in good faith negotiation for resolution of the alleged debt should be able to remove the collection trade line from the consumers credit reports which should be stipulated in a binding settlement agreement signed by both parties.

as FICO (the industry standard) uses proprietary algorithm that the collection agent cannot possibly guess at.

Collectors should be barred from stating that payment of a debt will definitively improve a consumers credit score

as FICO (the industry standard) uses proprietary algorithm that the collection agent cannot possibly guess at.


Input: As there can be a substantial monetary impact from incorrect entries on a credit report in the form of higher interest rates or being unable to secure a loan, bonafide disputes should NOT be allowed on a credit report.

As there can be a substantial monetary impact from incorrect entries on a credit report in the form of higher interest rates or being unable to secure a loan,

bonafide disputes should NOT be allowed on a credit report.

bonafide disputes should NOT be allowed on a credit report.

As there can be a substantial monetary impact from incorrect entries on a credit report in the form of higher interest rates or being unable to secure a loan,


Input: Collection agencies should abide by the rules and regulations surrounding HIPPA (medical), Customer Proprietary Network Information (FCC) and other statutes already in place. While the CRPB cannot change those statutes, agencies must still abide by it.

Collection agencies should abide by the rules and regulations surrounding HIPPA (medical), Customer Proprietary Network Information (FCC) and other statutes already in place.

While the CRPB cannot change those statutes,

agencies must still abide by it.


Input: Collection Calls and Dunning notices (via letter or email) should include a unique Collection ID. This would be listed in credit reports for the purposes of tracking and consumers would be able to enter into a online database provided by the CRPB with the type of violation or issue. This would also make it easier for the CRPB to look up disputes and determine if there' s an actual issue.

Collection Calls and Dunning notices (via letter or email) should include a unique Collection ID.

This would be listed in credit reports for the purposes of tracking

and consumers would be able to enter into a online database provided by the CRPB with the type of violation or issue.

This would also make it easier for the CRPB to look up disputes and determine if there' s an actual issue.

Collection Calls and Dunning notices (via letter or email) should include a unique Collection ID.

and consumers would be able to enter into a online database provided by the CRPB with the type of violation or issue.

Collection Calls and Dunning notices (via letter or email) should include a unique Collection ID.

This would also make it easier for the CRPB to look up disputes and determine if there' s an actual issue.


Input: There needs to be rules around how disputes are handled for people with the same or similar names. There needs to be a process for disputing incorrect information on a credit report as well as for handling mistaken identity with the courts.

There needs to be rules around how disputes are handled for people with the same or similar names.

There needs to be a process for disputing incorrect information on a credit report as well as for handling mistaken identity with the courts.


Input: I believe reasonable will depend on the circumstance of the dispute and the type of debt. A formal checklist should be created for various scenarios and the analyst reviewing the dispute should be able to enter comments against the checklist which would be part of the eoscar transcript.

I believe reasonable will depend on the circumstance of the dispute and the type of debt.

A formal checklist should be created for various scenarios

and the analyst reviewing the dispute should be able to enter comments against the checklist which would be part of the eoscar transcript.


Input: I believe all of the possibilities listed are necessary. I never did business with Joe' s Collection Agency and would never recognize any debt they allege is owed. Interest and other fees would make the amounts unrecognizable either even in the event I could miraculously determine that $757. 24 is an old utility bill.

I believe all of the possibilities listed are necessary.

Interest and other fees would make the amounts unrecognizable either even in the event I could miraculously determine that $757. 24 is an old utility bill.

I never did business with Joe' s Collection Agency and would never recognize any debt they allege is owed.

I never did business with Joe' s Collection Agency and would never recognize any debt they allege is owed.

Interest and other fees would make the amounts unrecognizable either even in the event I could miraculously determine that $757. 24 is an old utility bill.


Input: I am currently going through a miserable experience with a creditor and debt collector. In 2004 I completed my college education and consolidated all of my student loans through Nelnet. In 2005 (or so) I started to get calls from debt collectors stating that I was delinquent on my loan repayment. I explained the situation, that I had made all of my timely payments through Nelnet and, before I would pay anything else, I would need to see some proof of the debt. I never received any proof of the debt and this conversation reoccurred several times for the next five years. In 2011 I wanted to buy my (wife " s) dream home. It was a significant purchase and the bankers I talked with indicated I needed to clear up the student loan issue to be approved. I reached out to the original creditor and the debt collector and begged for some proof of the loan. They then provided me with a loan application (nothing to indicate that the application was approved or that any funds were ever dispersed to me). While I was not comfortable with the proof, I knew that fighting it out in court would take longer than I was willing to take. So, I was very purposeful in my conversations with the original creditor and the debt collector to make sure that the issue would be cleared on my credit report if I paid the full value of the (alleged) loan. I also recorded the conversations I had with the original creditor and the debt collector. I paid the original loan amount and (if you didn' t see this coming) the original creditor refused to update my credit report. And, even after providing the credit reporting agencies with proof that the debt was paid, they also refused to update my credit report. To make matters worse, after the debt was paid, I received a notice from the debt collector that several thousands of dollars had been excused. I immediately contacted the debt collector and requested documentation that would support their amount due, including documentation where I agreed to a specific interest rate. No response from the debt collector. So, I am now arguing it out with the IRS regarding any additional taxes that may be due. And, even though I paid the debt two years ago, my credit report has not yet been updated. It is simply ridiculous than any business would have this much power to have such a negative impact on an individual without any documentation to back it up. Any creditor should be required to provide certain documentation prior to making a negative credit reporting and there should be significant consequences for any creditor/debt collector that pursues a debt without having the required documentation.

I am currently going through a miserable experience with a creditor and debt collector.

In 2011 I wanted to buy my (wife " s) dream home.

It was a significant purchase

While I was not comfortable with the proof,

I knew that fighting it out in court would take longer than I was willing to take.

So, I was very purposeful in my conversations with the original creditor and the debt collector to make sure that the issue would be cleared on my credit report if I paid the full value of the (alleged) loan.

It is simply ridiculous than any business would have this much power to have such a negative impact on an individual without any documentation to back it up.

In 2004 I completed my college education and consolidated all of my student loans through Nelnet.

In 2005 (or so) I started to get calls from debt collectors stating that I was delinquent on my loan repayment.

I explained the situation, that I had made all of my timely payments through Nelnet and, before I would pay anything else, I would need to see some proof of the debt.

I never received any proof of the debt

and this conversation reoccurred several times for the next five years.

and the bankers I talked with indicated I needed to clear up the student loan issue to be approved.

I reached out to the original creditor and the debt collector and begged for some proof of the loan.

They then provided me with a loan application (nothing to indicate that the application was approved or that any funds were ever dispersed to me).

I also recorded the conversations I had with the original creditor and the debt collector.

I paid the original loan amount

and (if you didn' t see this coming) the original creditor refused to update my credit report.

And, even after providing the credit reporting agencies with proof that the debt was paid, they also refused to update my credit report.

To make matters worse, after the debt was paid, I received a notice from the debt collector that several thousands of dollars had been excused.

I immediately contacted the debt collector and requested documentation that would support their amount due, including documentation where I agreed to a specific interest rate.

No response from the debt collector.

So, I am now arguing it out with the IRS regarding any additional taxes that may be due.

And, even though I paid the debt two years ago, my credit report has not yet been updated.

Any creditor should be required to provide certain documentation prior to making a negative credit reporting and there should be significant consequences for any creditor/debt collector that pursues a debt without having the required documentation.

So, I was very purposeful in my conversations with the original creditor and the debt collector to make sure that the issue would be cleared on my credit report if I paid the full value of the (alleged) loan.

I knew that fighting it out in court would take longer than I was willing to take.

So, I am now arguing it out with the IRS regarding any additional taxes that may be due.

I immediately contacted the debt collector and requested documentation that would support their amount due, including documentation where I agreed to a specific interest rate.

So, I am now arguing it out with the IRS regarding any additional taxes that may be due.

No response from the debt collector.

Any creditor should be required to provide certain documentation prior to making a negative credit reporting and there should be significant consequences for any creditor/debt collector that pursues a debt without having the required documentation.

It is simply ridiculous than any business would have this much power to have such a negative impact on an individual without any documentation to back it up.


Input: It apprears that the debt collectors of the debt collection industry are conducting a money laundry and racketing operation by explointing and obtaining monetary from comsumers for products that they don' t sell to them or services that they don' t provide to consumers with no inital purchase contract with consumers. It appears that debt collectors are obtaining monetary from consumers where they don' t have licenses to sell products to consumers or provide services to consumers. It appears that debt collectors are costing companies money when companies are trying to recover their loses when they miss payments from their customers for the products that they sell to their customers or the services that they provide to their customers with alegal purchase contracts. It seems that debt collector are relying on companies' money and on consumers' money for an income when they are not initially involved in the a company sale of products to consumers or in the distributing of a company of services to a consumers.

It apprears that the debt collectors of the debt collection industry are conducting a money laundry and racketing operation by explointing and obtaining monetary from comsumers for products that they don' t sell to them or services that they don' t provide to consumers with no inital purchase contract with consumers.

It seems that debt collector are relying on companies' money and on consumers' money for an income when they are not initially involved in the a company sale of products to consumers or in the distributing of a company of services to a consumers.

It appears that debt collectors are obtaining monetary from consumers where they don' t have licenses to sell products to consumers or provide services to consumers.

It appears that debt collectors are costing companies money when companies are trying to recover their loses when they miss payments from their customers for the products that they sell to their customers or the services that they provide to their customers with alegal purchase contracts.


Input: A question that I' d ask surrounds dialects. There are numerous dialects for Spanish, French, etc. and it would be very expensive for agencies to translate every letter into every dialect of a certain language, Spanish being the most common for this type of occurrence. I' d greatly appreciate feedback, commentary and also recommendations on everyone' s view on how to address differing language formalities.

A question that I' d ask surrounds dialects.

and it would be very expensive for agencies to translate every letter into every dialect of a certain language, Spanish being the most common for this type of occurrence.

I' d greatly appreciate feedback, commentary and also recommendations on everyone' s view on how to address differing language formalities.

There are numerous dialects for Spanish, French, etc.


Input: If a bank is going to sell a consumer' s debt, the bank should be required to notify that consumer IN ADVANCE, and allow that consumer a fair chance to bid on and purchase his/her own debt, on terms just as favorable as the terms offered to any other debt buyer (which at present is usually pennies on the dollar). Debt buyers contribute nothing to society. Yet, they are allowed to obtain windfall profits by pursuing impoverished consumers for the full face value of such debts. This proposal would entail changes more extensive that just " notice " as it would require a change from bulk loan sales, to requiring an opportunity to purchase individual loan in certain circumstances.

If a bank is going to sell a consumer' s debt, the bank should be required to notify that consumer IN ADVANCE, and allow that consumer a fair chance to bid on and purchase his/her own debt, on terms just as favorable as the terms offered to any other debt buyer (which at present is usually pennies on the dollar).

Debt buyers contribute nothing to society.

Yet, they are allowed to obtain windfall profits by pursuing impoverished consumers for the full face value of such debts.

This proposal would entail changes more extensive that just " notice "

as it would require a change from bulk loan sales, to requiring an opportunity to purchase individual loan in certain circumstances.

This proposal would entail changes more extensive that just " notice "

as it would require a change from bulk loan sales, to requiring an opportunity to purchase individual loan in certain circumstances.


Input: I would take a hard look at' credit reporting' from what is being reported by a creditor and then what is reported by a debt collection or debt buying company. For example, if a creditor obtains a judgment amount greater than the account balance, that amount is likely not reported because creditors seldom have system capabilities to make adjustments to accounts.

I would take a hard look at' credit reporting' from what is being reported by a creditor and then what is reported by a debt collection or debt buying company.

For example, if a creditor obtains a judgment amount greater than the account balance, that amount is likely not reported

because creditors seldom have system capabilities to make adjustments to accounts.

For example, if a creditor obtains a judgment amount greater than the account balance, that amount is likely not reported

because creditors seldom have system capabilities to make adjustments to accounts.


Input: One theme we see throughout comments is that debt sold adds confusion as to whom is the creditor, and also triggers a new credit entry, making the debt appear as incremental (additional), when it is simply transferred, and fresh. The solution to this is simple; do not allow credit bureaus to ever list more than one entry for the same debt. Put the burden of accurate recordkeeping on the bureaus, because they are the only entities who have a responsibility for accurate recordkeeping and they are paid to keep accurate records. Currently the cost of sloppy systems is externalized to both creditors and borrowers, both of whom tend to re-externalize it to other creditors and borrowers in the form of higher costs. It is irrelevant whether these dual entries are caused by negligence, incompetence, or malice on the part of the creditor or collector because it is the responsibility of the credit reporting agency to make this practice impossible. Adding steep fines for double reporting would incentivize CRA' s to police their systems so each debt only garners one entry. Since CRA' s are immune from libel suits in most of the country regulatory oversight is especially important. Conversely, clarifying that reporting agencies are not immune from state libel laws--that regulatory authority is in addition to state defamation law--would also quickly incentivize more accurate reporting.

One theme we see throughout comments is that debt sold adds confusion as to whom is the creditor, and also triggers a new credit entry, making the debt appear as incremental (additional), when it is simply transferred, and fresh.

The solution to this is simple;

Currently the cost of sloppy systems is externalized to both creditors and borrowers, both of whom tend to re-externalize it to other creditors and borrowers in the form of higher costs.

It is irrelevant whether these dual entries are caused by negligence, incompetence, or malice on the part of the creditor or collector

because it is the responsibility of the credit reporting agency to make this practice impossible.

Adding steep fines for double reporting would incentivize CRA' s to police their systems so each debt only garners one entry.

regulatory oversight is especially important.

Conversely, clarifying that reporting agencies are not immune from state libel laws--that regulatory authority is in addition to state defamation law--would also quickly incentivize more accurate reporting.

do not allow credit bureaus to ever list more than one entry for the same debt.

Put the burden of accurate recordkeeping on the bureaus,

because they are the only entities who have a responsibility for accurate recordkeeping

and they are paid to keep accurate records.

Since CRA' s are immune from libel suits in most of the country

Put the burden of accurate recordkeeping on the bureaus,

because they are the only entities who have a responsibility for accurate recordkeeping

Put the burden of accurate recordkeeping on the bureaus,

and they are paid to keep accurate records.

It is irrelevant whether these dual entries are caused by negligence, incompetence, or malice on the part of the creditor or collector

because it is the responsibility of the credit reporting agency to make this practice impossible.

regulatory oversight is especially important.

Since CRA' s are immune from libel suits in most of the country


Input: I was harassed for months by a collector who used robo-calls 5 and 6 times a day and blocked its caller ID, for what turned out to be five different debts, none of which were mine. Robo-calls were not answered; if I picked up, nobody was there, and no messages were ever left. The blocked caller ID was " 1 Unavailable, " which is designed to outfox call-blocking from the recipient' s end, and makes it impossible to identify the caller using reverse number lookups and the like. One day I picked up and finally there was someone on the other end, so I was able to figure out who was calling, although they were very reluctant to say who they were. I then looked them up on the internet and got a phone number for them. I repeatedly stated I was not the person they were looking for, but they refused to stop calling. I finally got an attorney and after months of the attorney bickering with them, I did get a small money settlement. This was occurring when I was getting chemotherapy treatment for cancer and was very ill. My life was hell for months because of these practices. Collectors should be prohibited from concealing either their identity or their call-back numbers. This happened because I had moved and was assigned a new number that evidently had belonged to a number of individuals who had outstanding debts. I was afraid to change my number again because it would just usher in a new batch of collectors. There should also be much, much, much stiffer monetary penalties for violations. The guilty party in the above scenario was a national collection agency with huge annual revenues; the piddly amount I was eventually paid was to them a tiny fraction of one cent compared to their annual revenues. I just happen to be an attorney myself, and ran their name on Pacer--they had been sued over and over in state and federal court and had actually paid million dollar fines to state attorneys general--also just a small cost of doing business for them compared to their enormous annual revenues. We need much, much stiffer penalties. These people are cyber bullies with absolutely no scruples. At the very least they should be required to identify themselves on caller i. d. with a legitimate callback number, and robo-calls should be made illegal.

I was harassed for months by a collector who used robo-calls 5 and 6 times a day and blocked its caller ID, for what turned out to be five different debts, none of which were mine.

Robo-calls were not answered;

if I picked up, nobody was there,

and no messages were ever left.

The blocked caller ID was " 1 Unavailable, " which is designed to outfox call-blocking from the recipient' s end, and makes it impossible to identify the caller using reverse number lookups and the like.

One day I picked up

and finally there was someone on the other end,

so I was able to figure out who was calling,

I then looked them up on the internet and got a phone number for them.

I repeatedly stated I was not the person they were looking for,

but they refused to stop calling.

I finally got an attorney

and after months of the attorney bickering with them, I did get a small money settlement.

This was occurring when I was getting chemotherapy treatment for cancer and was very ill.

This happened

because I had moved and was assigned a new number that evidently had belonged to a number of individuals who had outstanding debts.

the piddly amount I was eventually paid was to them a tiny fraction of one cent compared to their annual revenues.

I just happen to be an attorney myself, and ran their name on Pacer--

they had been sued over and over in state and federal court and had actually paid million dollar fines to state attorneys general--also just a small cost of doing business for them compared to their enormous annual revenues.

although they were very reluctant to say who they were.

My life was hell for months because of these practices.

I was afraid to change my number again

because it would just usher in a new batch of collectors.

These people are cyber bullies with absolutely no scruples.

Collectors should be prohibited from concealing either their identity or their call-back numbers.

There should also be much, much, much stiffer monetary penalties for violations.

We need much, much stiffer penalties.

At the very least they should be required to identify themselves on caller i. d. with a legitimate callback number,

and robo-calls should be made illegal.

The guilty party in the above scenario was a national collection agency with huge annual revenues;

so I was able to figure out who was calling,

and finally there was someone on the other end,

Collectors should be prohibited from concealing either their identity or their call-back numbers.

My life was hell for months because of these practices.

This happened

because I had moved and was assigned a new number that evidently had belonged to a number of individuals who had outstanding debts.

I was afraid to change my number again

because it would just usher in a new batch of collectors.

There should also be much, much, much stiffer monetary penalties for violations.

the piddly amount I was eventually paid was to them a tiny fraction of one cent compared to their annual revenues.

We need much, much stiffer penalties.

the piddly amount I was eventually paid was to them a tiny fraction of one cent compared to their annual revenues.

We need much, much stiffer penalties.

they had been sued over and over in state and federal court and had actually paid million dollar fines to state attorneys general--also just a small cost of doing business for them compared to their enormous annual revenues.


Input: I left a long comment about one particular collector, but recently was harassed by yet another one who was trying to collect from someone else who was not me. Their caller ID was not a phone number; it was just the names of different states, but turned out to be the same company. These people are bottom-feeders with no scruples. Accurate caller ID should be required so the victim can at least identify the collector and have a call-back number for them. And monetary penalties should be much, much stiffer to discourage their outrageous, predatory and harassing practices. Harrassment is part of their business models. These people are scum and should be required at the very least to identify themselves accurately. Robo-calls and ID spoofing should be illegal with stiff fines.

I left a long comment about one particular collector, but recently was harassed by yet another one who was trying to collect from someone else who was not me.

Their caller ID was not a phone number;

it was just the names of different states, but turned out to be the same company.

These people are bottom-feeders with no scruples.

Harrassment is part of their business models.

Accurate caller ID should be required

And monetary penalties should be much, much stiffer to discourage their outrageous, predatory and harassing practices.

These people are scum and should be required at the very least to identify themselves accurately.

Robo-calls and ID spoofing should be illegal with stiff fines.

so the victim can at least identify the collector and have a call-back number for them.

Accurate caller ID should be required

so the victim can at least identify the collector and have a call-back number for them.


Input: They will just continue to call. Not answering does not stop the constant calls. They need to be required to identify themselves accurately so the consumer has at least a fighting chance to speak with them. In my case I have no debts of my own but am constantly harassed for other people' s debts because I have a fairly common last name. They just start calling everyone with the same last name as their actual debtor.

They will just continue to call.

Not answering does not stop the constant calls.

so the consumer has at least a fighting chance to speak with them.

They just start calling everyone with the same last name as their actual debtor.

They need to be required to identify themselves accurately

In my case I have no debts of my own but am constantly harassed for other people' s debts

because I have a fairly common last name.

They need to be required to identify themselves accurately

so the consumer has at least a fighting chance to speak with them.

In my case I have no debts of my own but am constantly harassed for other people' s debts

because I have a fairly common last name.


Input: It doesn' t just " occasionally " happen. It happens all the time. Those of us with common names are sitting ducks for these scumbags. I am constantly harassed by collectors looking for someone else. Call blocking programs do not work out of area, so call-blocking is no protection whatever.

It doesn' t just " occasionally " happen.

It happens all the time.

Those of us with common names are sitting ducks for these scumbags.

so call-blocking is no protection whatever.

I am constantly harassed by collectors looking for someone else.

Call blocking programs do not work out of area,

Those of us with common names are sitting ducks for these scumbags.

I am constantly harassed by collectors looking for someone else.

It doesn' t just " occasionally " happen.

It happens all the time.

so call-blocking is no protection whatever.

Call blocking programs do not work out of area,


Input: Right now collectors are legally required to stop phone contact when notified by the consumer. They do not stop. And the law is not enforced. Reporting violations to regulators does nothing except get the complainant into some sort of database, and the regulators are never heard from again. There are decent laws on the books. It' s the enforcement that is a failure.

Right now collectors are legally required to stop phone contact when notified by the consumer.

They do not stop.

And the law is not enforced.

Reporting violations to regulators does nothing except get the complainant into some sort of database,

and the regulators are never heard from again.

There are decent laws on the books.

It' s the enforcement that is a failure.


Input: The problem is enforcement. When collectors are notified to stop calling the consumer' s workplace, they refuse to obey the law that requires them to stop. Reporting violations to the regulators is futile, because nothing is ever done by way of enforcement and the collectors know this. Put teeth into enforcement.

The problem is enforcement.

Reporting violations to the regulators is futile,

When collectors are notified to stop calling the consumer' s workplace,

they refuse to obey the law that requires them to stop.

because nothing is ever done by way of enforcement and the collectors know this.

Put teeth into enforcement.

The problem is enforcement.

When collectors are notified to stop calling the consumer' s workplace,

The problem is enforcement.

they refuse to obey the law that requires them to stop.

The problem is enforcement.

they refuse to obey the law that requires them to stop.

Reporting violations to the regulators is futile,

because nothing is ever done by way of enforcement and the collectors know this.

Put teeth into enforcement.

The problem is enforcement.


Input: Calls to the workplace should not be permitted at all. Harassing the consumer at his her/workplace can come to the attention of the employer and get the consumer fired or limit advancement. The collector then does not get paid because of the collector' s own egregious conduct.

Calls to the workplace should not be permitted at all.

Harassing the consumer at his her/workplace can come to the attention of the employer and get the consumer fired or limit advancement.

The collector then does not get paid because of the collector' s own egregious conduct.

Calls to the workplace should not be permitted at all.

Harassing the consumer at his her/workplace can come to the attention of the employer and get the consumer fired or limit advancement.

Calls to the workplace should not be permitted at all.

The collector then does not get paid because of the collector' s own egregious conduct.


Input: Collectors constantly abuse laws concerning phone contacts, and there is no enforcement for violators. Collectors should be limited by law to contacts by mail. These people are bottom-feeders who ignore the law. Cut them off from phone contacts altogether. They have proven again and again over decades that they are scofflaws. No phone contacts.

Collectors constantly abuse laws concerning phone contacts,

and there is no enforcement for violators.

These people are bottom-feeders who ignore the law.

They have proven again and again over decades that they are scofflaws.

Collectors should be limited by law to contacts by mail.

Cut them off from phone contacts altogether.

No phone contacts.

Collectors should be limited by law to contacts by mail.

Collectors constantly abuse laws concerning phone contacts,

Collectors should be limited by law to contacts by mail.

and there is no enforcement for violators.

Collectors should be limited by law to contacts by mail.

These people are bottom-feeders who ignore the law.

Cut them off from phone contacts altogether.

These people are bottom-feeders who ignore the law.

Cut them off from phone contacts altogether.

They have proven again and again over decades that they are scofflaws.


Input: Additionally, as loans are set up on varied systems and they fall in to collections for calls to be made a break-out of phone types should be part of the " Solutions ". Example Home designated area, work designated area and Mobile-cell as well. Three separate' Solutions " therefore giving a increased likelyhood of calls to be within what the statue requires.

Additionally, as loans are set up on varied systems and they fall in to collections for calls to be made

a break-out of phone types should be part of the " Solutions ".

Example Home designated area, work designated area and Mobile-cell as well.

Three separate' Solutions " therefore giving a increased likelyhood of calls to be within what the statue requires.

a break-out of phone types should be part of the " Solutions ".

Additionally, as loans are set up on varied systems and they fall in to collections for calls to be made


Input: As Director I can clearly in good faith state that as we service our potential losses and my Team make collection calls contact is generally made at work place as well. Let me also state that many of the call backs are made from Members at work as well. It all depends on the employer and the work conditions surrounding the consumer.

As Director I can clearly in good faith state that as we service our potential losses

and my Team make collection calls contact is generally made at work place as well.

Let me also state that many of the call backs are made from Members at work as well.

It all depends on the employer and the work conditions surrounding the consumer.


Input: Let' s keep it as simple as possible. Based on 3rd party disclosure statue blocking the ID benifits the consumer. One never knows who is at the other end of the phone.

Let' s keep it as simple as possible.

Based on 3rd party disclosure statue blocking the ID benifits the consumer.

One never knows who is at the other end of the phone.

Based on 3rd party disclosure statue blocking the ID benifits the consumer.

One never knows who is at the other end of the phone.


Input: Consumers normally are unaware that their debt has been sold to a collection agency. They, one day, get a call about the debt from someone unbeknownst to them. The collection agency wants the consumer to remit the payment to them, when actually, principal on the debt never decreases because the collection agency gets their cut (commission) off the top. The debt is there essentially, forever with added late charges, interest and other penalties. I submit to the CFPB to finalize the " Know Before You Owe " rule and to outlay the debt validation rules so that consumers can make an informed choice before wasting their money on a debt they may not owe.

Consumers normally are unaware that their debt has been sold to a collection agency.

The collection agency wants the consumer to remit the payment to them,

so that consumers can make an informed choice before wasting their money on a debt they may not owe.

They, one day, get a call about the debt from someone unbeknownst to them.

when actually, principal on the debt never decreases

because the collection agency gets their cut (commission) off the top.

The debt is there essentially, forever with added late charges, interest and other penalties.

I submit to the CFPB to finalize the " Know Before You Owe " rule and to outlay the debt validation rules

when actually, principal on the debt never decreases

because the collection agency gets their cut (commission) off the top.

I submit to the CFPB to finalize the " Know Before You Owe " rule and to outlay the debt validation rules

so that consumers can make an informed choice before wasting their money on a debt they may not owe.


Input: Debt collectors call and cannot verify that the creditor has merged with another company. The debt may have written off the books of the acquired company. I propose that the CFPB implement a rule pertaining to debts written off by an acquired company and any additional stipulations on a timeframe to which an old debt can be collected only if the consumer has been validly notified that the debt has been sold to a debt collection agency; excluding the initial call from the DCA

Debt collectors call and cannot verify that the creditor has merged with another company.

The debt may have written off the books of the acquired company.

I propose that the CFPB implement a rule pertaining to debts written off by an acquired company and any additional stipulations on a timeframe to which an old debt can be collected only if the consumer has been validly notified that the debt has been sold to a debt collection agency; excluding the initial call from the DCA

Debt collectors call and cannot verify that the creditor has merged with another company.

The debt may have written off the books of the acquired company.

I propose that the CFPB implement a rule pertaining to debts written off by an acquired company and any additional stipulations on a timeframe to which an old debt can be collected only if the consumer has been validly notified that the debt has been sold to a debt collection agency; excluding the initial call from the DCA

Debt collectors call and cannot verify that the creditor has merged with another company.


Input: My problem with those debt collection companies employees I have had to deal with is this... they either call themselves agent, investigators, or they are members of a special department investigating a debt alluding to Law Enforcement or DA' s office. Most recently, as last week, they have indicated, they are going to contact me at my place of employment and are going to initiate civil action if I don' t contact them before the close of business. This is out of order and should be stop

My problem with those debt collection companies employees I have had to deal with is this...

they either call themselves agent, investigators,

or they are members of a special department investigating a debt alluding to Law Enforcement or DA' s office.

Most recently, as last week, they have indicated, they are going to contact me at my place of employment and are going to initiate civil action if I don' t contact them before the close of business.

This is out of order and should be stop


Input: One such collection company used the actual phone number of a District Civil Court office in a neighboring county in their phone message for my wife to collect on a debt many years old. This practice is deplorable and should have sever penalties towards any collection company/employee that uses this type of collection action.

One such collection company used the actual phone number of a District Civil Court office in a neighboring county in their phone message for my wife to collect on a debt many years old.

This practice is deplorable and should have sever penalties towards any collection company/employee that uses this type of collection action.


Input: I have experience collection companies who buys the debt from the 1st 2nd or 3rd party add on its fees along with the other companies fees, then submit a new account number to the original account as though it was a new account. So, a original account for the sake of argument was $500. 00 turns out to be listed on your credit report as a $3, 000 delinquent account. Government laws should not allow this practice to exist. What ever the original account is that' s what should be reported not interest and additional fees a collection company deems it can add to your credit bureau report.

I have experience collection companies who buys the debt from the 1st 2nd or 3rd party add on its fees along with the other companies fees, then submit a new account number to the original account as though it was a new account.

So, a original account for the sake of argument was $500. 00 turns out to be listed on your credit report as a $3, 000 delinquent account.

Government laws should not allow this practice to exist.

What ever the original account is that' s what should be reported not interest and additional fees a collection company deems it can add to your credit bureau report.

Government laws should not allow this practice to exist.

What ever the original account is that' s what should be reported not interest and additional fees a collection company deems it can add to your credit bureau report.


Input: In my opinion, collection companies, credit bureaus, and every one in between should be made to have some type of soft ware that could identify time-barred debt. Plus, regulation that will not allow creditors/buyers to reactivate an old debt. If a given state has its own statue of limitation regarding a legitimate time line to collect a debt, so be it. The Validation Notice, should identify the true facts of the debt in question. After complete due process has been exhausted, the record should be completely removed from the consumer file.

In my opinion, collection companies, credit bureaus, and every one in between should be made to have some type of soft ware that could identify time-barred debt. Plus, regulation that will not allow creditors/buyers to reactivate an old debt.

The Validation Notice, should identify the true facts of the debt in question.

After complete due process has been exhausted, the record should be completely removed from the consumer file.

If a given state has its own statue of limitation regarding a legitimate time line to collect a debt, so be it.


Input: Yes... the CFPB should require debt collectors/debt owners to notify consumers in writing, that a payment plan or partial plan will revive the time-barred debt. However, the debt owner or debt collection company should not be allowed to have a second chance to sue you for the old debt. This in itself would be bubble jeopardy in a criminal case of law. If anything a second seven year listing of the agreed balance you are willing to repay will be listed on ones credit bureau report would be allowed. Note: A collection company that purchased the account for pennies on the dollar, should " ONLY " be allowed to collect the amount of monies they purchased the account for plus any regulated reasonable fee amount. Because they were not the original lender in the first place. The original debt owners should " ONLY " be allowed to list the agreed pay off amount of the time-barred account, the consumer agreed to pay. Example: debt owner original time-barred account $1. 000. 00 dollars. Debt owner accepts $500. 00 and consumer agrees to pay back. The only amount to report is the $500. 00 dollars.

Yes... the CFPB should require debt collectors/debt owners to notify consumers in writing, that a payment plan or partial plan will revive the time-barred debt.

However, the debt owner or debt collection company should not be allowed to have a second chance to sue you for the old debt.

Note: A collection company that purchased the account for pennies on the dollar, should " ONLY " be allowed to collect the amount of monies they purchased the account for plus any regulated reasonable fee amount.

The original debt owners should " ONLY " be allowed to list the agreed pay off amount of the time-barred account, the consumer agreed to pay.

This in itself would be bubble jeopardy in a criminal case of law.

Because they were not the original lender in the first place.

If anything a second seven year listing of the agreed balance you are willing to repay will be listed on ones credit bureau report would be allowed.

Example: debt owner original time-barred account $1. 000. 00 dollars.

Debt owner accepts $500. 00 and consumer agrees to pay back.

The only amount to report is the $500. 00 dollars.

However, the debt owner or debt collection company should not be allowed to have a second chance to sue you for the old debt.

This in itself would be bubble jeopardy in a criminal case of law.

Note: A collection company that purchased the account for pennies on the dollar, should " ONLY " be allowed to collect the amount of monies they purchased the account for plus any regulated reasonable fee amount.

Because they were not the original lender in the first place.


Input: Here' s what the federal government laws should mandate how the collection companies and CRAs should investigate disputes All collection actions and reporting actions should stop immediately. The time line should be equal on the consumer, collection company, CRAs reporting period. The original debt owner or collection company that purchase the account, should produce the original copy of the signed contract, court documents, and any verifiable records relating to the dispute. Forward those documents to the disputing party within the set aside timeline. Any and all verification letters would have to state and indicate such findings. Once the dispute could not be verified by, name, social, signed document copy of original agreement, it should be immediately deleted. The collections companies and original debt owners are responsible for the validity of information they get, buy, receive, send or share. So, if they buy good or bad debt they should be held responsible. The number, types, unclear, clear, collections disputes should all be investigated the same

Here' s what the federal government laws should mandate how the collection companies and CRAs should investigate disputes

The collections companies and original debt owners are responsible for the validity of information they get, buy, receive, send or share.

All collection actions and reporting actions should stop immediately.

The time line should be equal on the consumer, collection company, CRAs reporting period.

The original debt owner or collection company that purchase the account, should produce the original copy of the signed contract, court documents, and any verifiable records relating to the dispute.

Forward those documents to the disputing party within the set aside timeline.

Any and all verification letters would have to state and indicate such findings.

Once the dispute could not be verified by, name, social, signed document copy of original agreement, it should be immediately deleted.

So, if they buy good or bad debt they should be held responsible.

The number, types, unclear, clear, collections disputes should all be investigated the same

So, if they buy good or bad debt they should be held responsible.

The collections companies and original debt owners are responsible for the validity of information they get, buy, receive, send or share.


Input: Debt was sold to another company. So now debt is listed on my credit twice. So debt will last more than 10 years on report. Plus I' ve been a victim of identity theft twice. Both times I reported it to the police and to the credit agencies. Unfortunately nothing police can do but write a report for proof. Credit agency was ordered to put a fraud alert on my social but fail to do so.

Debt was sold to another company.

So now debt is listed on my credit twice.

So debt will last more than 10 years on report.

Plus I' ve been a victim of identity theft twice.

Both times I reported it to the police and to the credit agencies.

Unfortunately nothing police can do but write a report for proof.

Credit agency was ordered to put a fraud alert on my social but fail to do so.

So now debt is listed on my credit twice.

Debt was sold to another company.

So debt will last more than 10 years on report.

So now debt is listed on my credit twice.


Input: I have had debt collectors call and tell me that I am not cooperating to get the debt resolved, yell at me, tell me I must be lazy or not understand I owe the money. They have called me from 7: 00 am to 9: 00pm at least 10 times during the day using a different company name, different phone number and location including my city and other cities and states all in the same day. When I tell them I am a senior they tell me to borrow the money from a family member or friend. When I tell them I am not going to do that the harrassment starts all over. Many of them call and act like I am an old friend before they tell me who they are. They threaten to ruin my credit raiting, confiscate my home and belonging and car, The most annoying is when they call and I answer they hang up and call again an hr later and hang up again. I know it is them because I have caller id.

I have had debt collectors call and tell me that I am not cooperating to get the debt resolved, yell at me, tell me I must be lazy or not understand I owe the money.

They have called me from 7: 00 am to 9: 00pm at least 10 times during the day using a different company name, different phone number and location including my city and other cities and states all in the same day.

When I tell them I am a senior they tell me to borrow the money from a family member or friend.

When I tell them I am not going to do that the harrassment starts all over.

Many of them call and act like I am an old friend before they tell me who they are.

They threaten to ruin my credit raiting, confiscate my home and belonging and car,

because I have caller id.

The most annoying is when they call and I answer they hang up and call again an hr later and hang up again.

I know it is them

I know it is them

because I have caller id.


Input: I had to spend quite a bit of time dealing with their repeated calls. Of course, they weren' t looking for me but rather for someone with my very common last name and first initial. I had many calls from them one day. Apparently, their telephone representatives were trained to hang up if they received any response other than, " How do I pay? " They' d hang up on me before I could complete a sentence. That particular day, either by accident or through malice (I suspect the latter.), they had their robo dialer programmed to call back immediately. The representative would hang up on me and before I could step away from the phone, the robo dialer would call me back and I' d be speaking with another representative who would hang up on me. After many such calls and hang-ups, I was finally able to get a representative to stay on the line with me long enough for me to explain that they were calling the wrong person. After that the calls stopped. As I think back on this experience, I find it quite comical, but I didn' t at the time. I did file complaints with the FTC and my state' s Attorney General.

I had to spend quite a bit of time dealing with their repeated calls.

Of course, they weren' t looking for me but rather for someone with my very common last name and first initial.

I had many calls from them one day.

Apparently, their telephone representatives were trained to hang up if they received any response other than, " How do I pay? "

They' d hang up on me before I could complete a sentence.

they had their robo dialer programmed to call back immediately.

The representative would hang up on me

and before I could step away from the phone, the robo dialer would call me back

and I' d be speaking with another representative who would hang up on me.

After many such calls and hang-ups, I was finally able to get a representative to stay on the line with me long enough for me to explain that they were calling the wrong person.

After that the calls stopped.

I did file complaints with the FTC and my state' s Attorney General.

That particular day, either by accident or through malice (I suspect the latter.),

As I think back on this experience, I find it quite comical,

but I didn' t at the time.


Input: The original comment was suggesting that anytime a debt collector calls they are automatically agreeing to be recorded if the consumer chooses to do so. I think that is a FANTASTIC idea.

The original comment was suggesting that anytime a debt collector calls they are automatically agreeing to be recorded if the consumer chooses to do so.

I think that is a FANTASTIC idea.


Input: Consumers should be able to request calls be limited to one contact per week if they desire. That is a fair and honorable compromise,

Consumers should be able to request calls be limited to one contact per week if they desire.

That is a fair and honorable compromise,


Input: Just like Cable companies may expect their customers to give them a four hour window for service calls, consumers should be allowed to choose a time frame they prefer to be called within. If they never respond within that time frame, then the debt collector could try a different time frame.

Just like Cable companies may expect their customers to give them a four hour window for service calls,

consumers should be allowed to choose a time frame they prefer to be called within.

If they never respond within that time frame, then the debt collector could try a different time frame.


Input: I am saying that collection agencies cannot be trusted and more often than not go beyond their job scope. Some act as loan sharks and not collection agencies. I also think that their behavior is criminal when it comes to making threats against consumers and harassing people with disabilities and seniors. So, yes i think criminal charges should be pursued for their cover ups and harassment. Also other violations of privacy and fairness.

I am saying that collection agencies cannot be trusted and more often than not go beyond their job scope.

Some act as loan sharks and not collection agencies.

I also think that their behavior is criminal when it comes to making threats against consumers and harassing people with disabilities and seniors.

So, yes i think criminal charges should be pursued for their cover ups and harassment. Also other violations of privacy and fairness.

I am saying that collection agencies cannot be trusted and more often than not go beyond their job scope.

Some act as loan sharks and not collection agencies.

I am saying that collection agencies cannot be trusted and more often than not go beyond their job scope.

I also think that their behavior is criminal when it comes to making threats against consumers and harassing people with disabilities and seniors.

So, yes i think criminal charges should be pursued for their cover ups and harassment. Also other violations of privacy and fairness.

Some act as loan sharks and not collection agencies.

So, yes i think criminal charges should be pursued for their cover ups and harassment. Also other violations of privacy and fairness.

I also think that their behavior is criminal when it comes to making threats against consumers and harassing people with disabilities and seniors.


Input: Yes. I think there is a way to get the debt collectors on board. The CFPB can remind them that debt collection companies may be exposing their own phone reps/employees to unnecessary verbal abuse from customers who have a legitimate justification for being upset because of follow up calls that ignore the updated agreement just reached in the prior call. If the previous communication with the debt collector creates a new timeline for possible repayment, then the debt collector should not step on that timeline by making subsequent calls less than a week later. unless the customers says call back in less than a weeks time. This also gives the debt collection phone rep the ability to say... " It has been a week or longer since our last communication "... Which allows the customer a moment to realize they are not being harassed on a daily basis by the same debt collector. Some consumers have situations in which their income grinds to zero and they may default on more than one account. Imagine 5 debt collectors each calling twice a day. Even one call a week can still equal one call a day if a consumer has five simultaneous defaults, but that is certainly preferable to 2 calls a day from each collection account, which would equal 10 calls a day, every day.

Yes. I think there is a way to get the debt collectors on board.

This also gives the debt collection phone rep the ability to say... " It has been a week or longer since our last communication "... Which allows the customer a moment to realize they are not being harassed on a daily basis by the same debt collector.

and they may default on more than one account.

but that is certainly preferable to 2 calls a day from each collection account, which would equal 10 calls a day, every day.

The CFPB can remind them that debt collection companies may be exposing their own phone reps/employees to unnecessary verbal abuse from customers who have a legitimate justification for being upset because of follow up calls that ignore the updated agreement just reached in the prior call.

Some consumers have situations in which their income grinds to zero

Even one call a week can still equal one call a day if a consumer has five simultaneous defaults,

If the previous communication with the debt collector creates a new timeline for possible repayment, then the debt collector should not step on that timeline by making subsequent calls less than a week later. unless the customers says call back in less than a weeks time.

Imagine 5 debt collectors each calling twice a day.

If the previous communication with the debt collector creates a new timeline for possible repayment, then the debt collector should not step on that timeline by making subsequent calls less than a week later. unless the customers says call back in less than a weeks time.

This also gives the debt collection phone rep the ability to say... " It has been a week or longer since our last communication "... Which allows the customer a moment to realize they are not being harassed on a daily basis by the same debt collector.

and they may default on more than one account.

Some consumers have situations in which their income grinds to zero


Input: This question is most interesting with respect to student loans. Unlike most other debts, student loans have the potential to be greater than $75k, which means a consumer can be sued in Federal Court under supplemental jurisdiction provisions. Additionally, should the current creditor be able to achieve complete diversity, the consumer can be sued in an entirely different state.

This question is most interesting with respect to student loans.

Unlike most other debts, student loans have the potential to be greater than $75k,

which means a consumer can be sued in Federal Court under supplemental jurisdiction provisions.

Additionally, should the current creditor be able to achieve complete diversity, the consumer can be sued in an entirely different state.

This question is most interesting with respect to student loans.

which means a consumer can be sued in Federal Court under supplemental jurisdiction provisions.

This question is most interesting with respect to student loans.

Additionally, should the current creditor be able to achieve complete diversity, the consumer can be sued in an entirely different state.

which means a consumer can be sued in Federal Court under supplemental jurisdiction provisions.

Unlike most other debts, student loans have the potential to be greater than $75k,

Additionally, should the current creditor be able to achieve complete diversity, the consumer can be sued in an entirely different state.

Unlike most other debts, student loans have the potential to be greater than $75k,


Input: Some problems that debt collectors and buyers have with giving consumers this information arises in the field of Electronic Data Interchange. Here, not all debts, especially with interest are calculated the same way, and since there are fees, such as statutory attorneys fees, and court costs, which can be added to the balance, calculating the balance becomes cumbersome when the data is transferred among Trading Partners on a daily basis because the data gets lost in translation over day-to-day lags. Computers don' t think the same way people do and what we think is a simple calculation is muddled when partial payments are added and the data is transmitted between parties.

Some problems that debt collectors and buyers have with giving consumers this information arises in the field of Electronic Data Interchange.

calculating the balance becomes cumbersome when the data is transferred among Trading Partners on a daily basis

Computers don' t think the same way people do

and what we think is a simple calculation is muddled when partial payments are added and the data is transmitted between parties.

Here, not all debts, especially with interest are calculated the same way,

and since there are fees, such as statutory attorneys fees, and court costs, which can be added to the balance,

because the data gets lost in translation over day-to-day lags.

Some problems that debt collectors and buyers have with giving consumers this information arises in the field of Electronic Data Interchange.

Here, not all debts, especially with interest are calculated the same way,

Some problems that debt collectors and buyers have with giving consumers this information arises in the field of Electronic Data Interchange.

calculating the balance becomes cumbersome when the data is transferred among Trading Partners on a daily basis

calculating the balance becomes cumbersome when the data is transferred among Trading Partners on a daily basis

and since there are fees, such as statutory attorneys fees, and court costs, which can be added to the balance,

calculating the balance becomes cumbersome when the data is transferred among Trading Partners on a daily basis

because the data gets lost in translation over day-to-day lags.


Input: Student Loans, Many of the problems that students are facing are with student loans from the private sector. Take for example Sallie Mae, this company has it on file that i dod not graduate from college and i did graduate. Their collections agencies are like loan sharks going to the extreme of making threats and cussing out students who cannot make payments. I know for some people it is easy to make payments on student loans but for many it is a struggle to get by. All students are trying to better themselves and sometimes they simply cannot afford to make payments. Companies like Sallie Mae are in the business of making peoples lives miserable. Their collection practices, customer service and lack of options are usually the reason why students default on their loans. Paying for college is a marathon not a sprint and these companies treat the repayment of student loans like a sprint. I think they need to offer more options to students. I also think private institutions ala the schools that lend money to students need to do a better job at giving students options to prevent default. resolutions and remedy not judgement and default.

Student Loans, Many of the problems that students are facing are with student loans from the private sector.

Their collections agencies are like loan sharks going to the extreme of making threats and cussing out students who cannot make payments.

I know for some people it is easy to make payments on student loans

All students are trying to better themselves

Companies like Sallie Mae are in the business of making peoples lives miserable.

Paying for college is a marathon not a sprint

and these companies treat the repayment of student loans like a sprint.

Take for example Sallie Mae, this company has it on file that i dod not graduate from college

and i did graduate.

but for many it is a struggle to get by.

and sometimes they simply cannot afford to make payments.

Their collection practices, customer service and lack of options are usually the reason why students default on their loans.

I think they need to offer more options to students.

I also think private institutions ala the schools that lend money to students need to do a better job at giving students options to prevent default. resolutions and remedy not judgement and default.

Student Loans, Many of the problems that students are facing are with student loans from the private sector.

Take for example Sallie Mae, this company has it on file that i dod not graduate from college

Student Loans, Many of the problems that students are facing are with student loans from the private sector.

and i did graduate.

Student Loans, Many of the problems that students are facing are with student loans from the private sector.

Their collections agencies are like loan sharks going to the extreme of making threats and cussing out students who cannot make payments.

Their collection practices, customer service and lack of options are usually the reason why students default on their loans.

Paying for college is a marathon not a sprint

Their collection practices, customer service and lack of options are usually the reason why students default on their loans.

and these companies treat the repayment of student loans like a sprint.

I think they need to offer more options to students.

Their collection practices, customer service and lack of options are usually the reason why students default on their loans.


Input: False of misleading are rearranging paper work to suit their claims, false allegations against the lender, personal harassment, humiliation on credit reports, preventing students from seeking consolidation form other companies. Other false or misleading is the assumption that students dont want to repay their loans. That is not true. They also mix up the paper work so much it is difficult to get to the bottom of why the loans are in default in the first place. They need to streamline their services and offer students option in the private loan sector. The institutions should do the same because they treat student loans like mortgage loans.

False of misleading are rearranging paper work to suit their claims, false allegations against the lender, personal harassment, humiliation on credit reports, preventing students from seeking consolidation form other companies.

Other false or misleading is the assumption that students dont want to repay their loans.

That is not true.

They also mix up the paper work so much it is difficult to get to the bottom of why the loans are in default in the first place.

because they treat student loans like mortgage loans.

They need to streamline their services and offer students option in the private loan sector.

The institutions should do the same

The institutions should do the same

because they treat student loans like mortgage loans.


Input: Too many collectors call and never report the " mini-Miranda warning ". They call all times of the day and night, and multiple times of the day. If they don' t get you because your have called ID, they will change their ID and try again. It is simply harrassment. Many will challenge the the consumer, threaten, and even harrass them to the point that I saw someone actually contemplate suicide. Also, when a debt is sold, the information for the orginal details need to go with it. many times these collectors will call, and they have no details on debts that are 5 and 6 years old, and the consumer doesn' t rememer it.

Too many collectors call and never report the " mini-Miranda warning ".

If they don' t get you because your have called ID, they will change their ID and try again.

It is simply harrassment.

Many will challenge the the consumer, threaten, and even harrass them to the point that I saw someone actually contemplate suicide.

They call all times of the day and night, and multiple times of the day.

many times these collectors will call,

and they have no details on debts that are 5 and 6 years old,

and the consumer doesn' t rememer it.

Also, when a debt is sold, the information for the orginal details need to go with it.


Input: A certified letter plus a regular letter should be sent. It proves that a consumer is at least aware of the debt and has X time to respond. Should cost any more then the postage of the regular letter.

A certified letter plus a regular letter should be sent.

Should cost any more then the postage of the regular letter.

It proves that a consumer is at least aware of the debt and has X time to respond.

A certified letter plus a regular letter should be sent.

It proves that a consumer is at least aware of the debt and has X time to respond.


Input: Having been recently included for free credit checking, after the Target identity theft issue, I checked my credit with Experian and found a $9, 924 " collection " on my credit report, resulting in a 610 FICO score! I had never heard of Portfolio Recovery, a company located in Virginia. I immediately wrote to the Office of Consumer Affairs in Virginia, detailing what this erroneous addition to my credit report had done to my overall score and my ability to maintain good credit. ALL of my credit cards lowered my limits, but I thought that had been in response to the ongoing bank investigations and the banks way of getting back at consumers. It all made sense when I saw this entry. What shocked, alarmed and enraged me most is that Experian excepted this " collection " entry without documentation. I can assure you that none exists. However, I have been a victim of lost wallets and identity theft within the last 20 years and may have seemed a legitimate target to Bottom-feeder agencies like Portfolio Recovery (the Internet is rife with consumer complaints about their tactics and illegal practices attempting to collect " debts! " I intend to pursue this matter by informing our Attorney General Kamala Harris and am grateful that you are targeting an otherwise unassailable lobby. Anytime a consumer writes to a credit reporting agency, the letter winds up in Mumbai, is laughed at and never acted upon. Experian, TransUnion and Equifax should undergo a Congressional investigation, during which their anti-consumer orientation and fraudulent reporting will be noted, as well as the impossibility of restoring a former 810 FICO, once scumbags like Portfolio Recovery have been allowed clear access to ruin the credit score and compromise the professional life and earning potential of millions of consumers.

Having been recently included for free credit checking, after the Target identity theft issue, I checked my credit with Experian and found a $9, 924 " collection " on my credit report, resulting in a 610 FICO score!

I had never heard of Portfolio Recovery, a company located in Virginia.

I immediately wrote to the Office of Consumer Affairs in Virginia, detailing what this erroneous addition to my credit report had done to my overall score and my ability to maintain good credit.

ALL of my credit cards lowered my limits,

I can assure you that none exists.

However, I have been a victim of lost wallets and identity theft within the last 20 years and may have seemed a legitimate target to Bottom-feeder agencies like Portfolio Recovery

but I thought that had been in response to the ongoing bank investigations and the banks way of getting back at consumers.

It all made sense when I saw this entry.

What shocked, alarmed and enraged me most is that Experian excepted this " collection " entry without documentation.

(the Internet is rife with consumer complaints about their tactics and illegal practices attempting to collect " debts! "

I intend to pursue this matter by informing our Attorney General Kamala Harris and am grateful that you are targeting an otherwise unassailable lobby.

Anytime a consumer writes to a credit reporting agency, the letter winds up in Mumbai, is laughed at and never acted upon.

Experian, TransUnion and Equifax should undergo a Congressional investigation, during which their anti-consumer orientation and fraudulent reporting will be noted, as well as the impossibility of restoring a former 810 FICO, once scumbags like Portfolio Recovery have been allowed clear access to ruin the credit score and compromise the professional life and earning potential of millions of consumers.


Input: The debt collector must be required to submit the original application for credit with the consumer' s original signature and the original letter of approval for the credit. The debt collection company should be required to submit full documentation that the debt actually exists. Too many debt collectors rely on falsified affidavits.

The debt collector must be required to submit the original application for credit with the consumer' s original signature and the original letter of approval for the credit.

The debt collection company should be required to submit full documentation that the debt actually exists.

Too many debt collectors rely on falsified affidavits.

The debt collection company should be required to submit full documentation that the debt actually exists.

Too many debt collectors rely on falsified affidavits.


Input: During the past 2 years I have been repeatedly contacted by a variety of collection agencies. It began innocently enough, when one of them called me, asking " when can we expect your payment, " when that statement had not yet arrived and was not due until the 20th of the month and the call occurred on the 11th. It was a collection agency hired by Capital One. Coincidentally, I purchased various items at Costco a few days later and received the shock of my little life when my credit card was denied. I called Capital One from a phone at Costco and was told I had not made my payment... this was even stranger because I pay off my balance each month. What I didn' t know is that Costco switched from a very nice bank (HSBC) to Capital One, never notified me and Capital One immediately played hardball, albeit unnecessarily. To answer their strong-arm tactics, I wrote a letter to Robert Crawford, the incoming CFO of Capital One, in which I had cut up both credit cards and told him to " shove it, " for treating a long-time customer like something you scrape off the shoe! When the collection calls began, I was in a great mood after all, I had initiated this mess. However, they were unfaird from the beginning. They use I. V. R. numbers. Without technical jargon, it means that the number we see on caller i. d. is never the number from which they' re calling, so you can' t block their call my provider allows me to block 12 numbers and I wondered how these collection agencies were constantly squeaking by). They robodial, so you can and do get several calls per day and before 8: 00 AM and after 9: 00 PM, since they know there is very little you can do about the early or late calls, besides whine That said, what followed was even worse.... the collection agency (Portfolio Recovery) which was able to place a bogus $9, 924 " collection " on my Experian credit score, which I saw because Target offered me 1-year free credit monitoring, which, by the way, isn' t free if you want to see your complete profile... they have no paperwork to substantiate this charge and it has completely ruined my credit, pulling down my FICO from 795-810 to 610! To me, having collection agency CEO' s boiled in oil seems like an act of mercy!

During the past 2 years I have been repeatedly contacted by a variety of collection agencies.

It began innocently enough, when one of them called me, asking " when can we expect your payment, " when that statement had not yet arrived and was not due until the 20th of the month and the call occurred on the 11th.

It was a collection agency hired by Capital One.

Coincidentally, I purchased various items at Costco a few days later and received the shock of my little life when my credit card was denied.

I called Capital One from a phone at Costco and was told I had not made my payment...

because I pay off my balance each month.

What I didn' t know is that Costco switched from a very nice bank (HSBC) to Capital One, never notified me

To answer their strong-arm tactics, I wrote a letter to Robert Crawford, the incoming CFO of Capital One, in which I had cut up both credit cards and told him to " shove it, " for treating a long-time customer like something you scrape off the shoe!

after all, I had initiated this mess.

They use I. V. R. numbers.

my provider allows me to block 12 numbers

the collection agency (Portfolio Recovery) which was able to place a bogus $9, 924 " collection " on my Experian credit score, which I saw because Target offered me 1-year free credit monitoring, which, by the way, isn' t free if you want to see your complete profile...

they have no paperwork to substantiate this charge

and it has completely ruined my credit, pulling down my FICO from 795-810 to 610!

this was even stranger

and Capital One immediately played hardball, albeit unnecessarily.

When the collection calls began, I was in a great mood

However, they were unfaird from the beginning.

and I wondered how these collection agencies were constantly squeaking by).

since they know there is very little you can do about the early or late calls, besides whine

That said, what followed was even worse....

To me, having collection agency CEO' s boiled in oil seems like an act of mercy!

Without technical jargon, it means that the number we see on caller i. d. is never the number from which they' re calling,

so you can' t block their call

They robodial,

so you can and do get several calls per day and before 8: 00 AM and after 9: 00 PM,

this was even stranger

because I pay off my balance each month.

When the collection calls began, I was in a great mood

after all, I had initiated this mess.

so you can' t block their call

Without technical jargon, it means that the number we see on caller i. d. is never the number from which they' re calling,

and I wondered how these collection agencies were constantly squeaking by).

my provider allows me to block 12 numbers

so you can and do get several calls per day and before 8: 00 AM and after 9: 00 PM,

They robodial,

so you can and do get several calls per day and before 8: 00 AM and after 9: 00 PM,

since they know there is very little you can do about the early or late calls, besides whine


Input: I do not agree, when it come to company call or text all day and night. New federal rule should not do this at all. It sound like somebody is getting pay to put this new federal laws. It all about money as always

I do not agree, when it come to company call or text all day and night.

It sound like somebody is getting pay to put this new federal laws.

It all about money as always

New federal rule should not do this at all.