Thank you, CleaningUp. I forgot to check Bud Hibbs...shame on me.
Can we rule out Hanna and Family? I don't think so: Loganville,
GA is their branch office location...so Hanna MIGHT have their hands on this one. Loganville is located in Gwinnett County, GA (
Wikipedia entry); one of the towns/cities in that county is NORCROSS, GA, a major business center for the Hanna family. Gwinnett County is also in the ATLANTA, GA, metro area...and that area also includes Norcross (
Cobb County Wikipedia page;
Metro Atlanta Wikipedia page...see under "Counties" and "Municipalities" ).
Also note that AIS is incorporated in Delaware. The AIS, LLC entry is here:
https://sos-res.state.de.us/tin/ controller (link is broken because it will not get the page; the page is attached as a .pdf ). The date, however, raises questions as to whether this entity is the entity we are searching for. If it isn't? Then that raises a lot of questions, starting with whether they have a corporate existence at all and/or where it is.
(To check for yourself, the URL is
http://sos-res.state.de.us/ to get the search page .)
In any case, I would not be surprised if the Hanna family is involved. After all, AIS, LLC is SO cheap, it appears that they won't even hire real people to collect:
http://ais.virtualcollector.net/"AIS VIRTUAL Collector". All automated, from first contact to payment, if one does pay...they don't even take calls disputing debts. Instead...
http://ais.virtualcollector.net/Dispute.aspxAnd note what they REQUIRE the alleged debtor to provide for information and HOW the consumer HAS to do it:
Disputes are handled via mail only. Please send a detailed description of the nature of your dispute to the address below:
AIS Services, LLC
50 California Street, Suite 1500
San Francisco, CA 94111
Attention: Dispute Department
...[M]ake sure to include your Social Security number (required), original account number, our file number (if available) and/or any documentation relevant to your dispute. We will not process disputes that do not have this information or appropriate evidence and/or documentation to substantiate your claim.
Do we see violations here, boys and girls?
I do...
1.) They are
admitting to deliberately NOT getting verification as required per §809 [§1692g] of the FDCPA. In fact, it appears as if the
consumer is
expected to "validate" their own alleged debt. Never mind that providing all the information they would want would give THEM documentation it is clear that they DO NOT HAVE and may well not be able to get.
In addition, NONE of the information demanded is
required to validate debt per the FDCPA (all that's needed is enough to identify the collection account so the collector knows which one to get verification for). Certainly the consumer is NOT required to provide a detailed request nor any documentation to get validation.
Also, verbal disputes are acceptable per the FDCPA, but do not invoke all the protections per the FDCPA. The fact that AIS, Inc. will accept ONLY written disputes from consumers (that instruction to call them in that dunning letter is not consistent with their own procedures!) is a violation in itself, and adds to the "false and misleading" character of their collection process.
2.) Judging by this thread, it appears that their portfolios may well be the "bottom of the barrel" multiple-placement debts that have been through several collectors/JDBs already and may well be out of statute, and/or missing documentation and/or not owed to begin with. A JDB that is either owned by money-grubbing S.O.B.s who don't care how they get the money as long as they get it...or may well be the "last-chance" affiliate to collect on debt that
someone owns and has not succeeded in collecting upon (such as...Hanna?).
3.) Flying, is that letter you are referring to the one posted at
Bud Hibbs', AIS, LLC letter ? If so, they should congratulate themselves: AIS, LLC is now subject to the CROA!
Not only are they trying to cover their a$$es by trying to pass off a
mass-produced form letter for a file that never saw the desk of any collection agent (there are none) as a legitimate settlement offer but they actually have sunk themselves by requiring payment in advance to "repair credit", illegal per the CROA.
This one may well be profitable...but not to the entity that AIS, LLC.
thinks will profit...
