FTC advisory opinion in favor of collectors is absolute proof of its corruption
The FTC just issued an advisory letter that left the ACA “delighted” and completely preempts the FDCPA validation requirement.
http://www.acainternational.org/files.aspx?p=/images/14382/p064803-ftc-advisory-opinion.pdf
...
After reviewing the language of the FDCPA and the Rule, and considering the goals of the statute and the regulation, the Commission concludes that a debt collector does not violate Section 805(c) of the FDCPA if the consumer directly disputes information after sending a written “cease communication” to the collector, and the collector complies with the Rule by means of a communication that has no purpose other than complying with the Rule by stating (1) the results of the investigation or (2) the collector’s belief that the communication is frivolous or irrelevant.
...
I don’t have a problem with a collector being allowed to contact a consumer despite the cease and desist to VALIDATE the account after receiving the dispute. However, the FTC clearly ENCOURAGES collectors to simply state that they find the dispute frivolous WITHOUT validating!
Of course “somebody” should send a letter to the FTC to ask WHY collectors all of sudden don’t have to validate disputed accounts anymore. Too bad that I’m the only person who cares and I just can’t afford to waste my time on documenting the corruption of the regulators without getting paid.
Last year I tried to start a membership organization like the ACA for consumers, but NOBODY wanted to pay a few bucks to finance these types of activities and lobby for consumer rights. It is understandable that many people with collections don’t have a lot of extra money, but don’t tell me you don’t have $20. So, good luck to you all! You get what you paid for.
And speaking of payments, here are my FTC complaints on behalf of paying clients:
http://credit-reporting-collection-ftc-complaints.info/
Posted by Christine on 07/02/2009 at 09:50 AM
Legal • Regulators - legislators • Corruption • (0) Comments • Permalink
