Debt collectors are sometimes difficult to deal with that even the toughest customer can be agitated. They demand for immediate repayments you haven't paid for sometime and this is where Liz Nero of Brooklyn, N.Y. has experienced. But today, the debt collector in return has to pay her half of the amount of her debt.
This was a result of the collector's oversight on implementing their guidelines. Nero received a notice from the collector demanding repayment and in that notice two words are missing which are required by the law. This was Nero's basis in filing a federal lawsuit against the collector where she won. She was given an award of $500 in damages, additional lawyer's fees and other court payments.
If you borrow money, you have to know your rights and that includes you have the right to live peacefully and not to be harassed. But even if the debt collector has a sound common sense, he is still guilty of the minor oversight which violates civil law. This could be a reason where you can file a federal lawsuit against them.
Under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act a collector must initiate to send a "validation notice" to the debtor showing the amount to be collected and to whom it shall be paid. It is further specified in the law that notices shall be used by the collectors to inform debtors the following:
The debtor has the right to appeal the claim in writing within a 30 days period.
If there is an appeal, reply must be properly documented by the collector to support validity of the claim.
Should the claim involves a debt originating from another sources, he must be informed of the original creditor's identity.
Nero's collector firm sent the notice covering everything mandated by the FDCPA, but did not disclose the statement about writing to the firm if Nero chooses to contest the debt. The statement of the FDCA requires debt collectors to inform customers their rights in a specified manner and the firm failed to do so. The missing two words "in writing" was the reason why the firm was ordered to pay statutory damages to Nero in the amount of $500 plus additional fees for attorney and court payments.
Two violations of the FDCPA were cited by Nero's attorney which are more familiar than the omissions done by the collector. One is their failure to inform debtors about the increase of the balance due with the accrual of the interest charges, this is if debtors failed to pay the claim and the other is when a collection agency have mistakenly implied that when debt are not paid, debtors will go through hardships which may include actions like garnishment of wages and confiscating of assets. These actions are only done with the court's judgment and collectors are in no position to do so.
It is therefore best to check if your debt collector has a valid license to operate locally and if they have not, you have the reason to file an FDCPA case if ever they threaten you to bring you to court.
Where military families can find financial support
