Author Topic: Limited cease comm  (Read 1184 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

decamp

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 267
Limited cease comm
« on: September 09, 2009 11:04:18 PM »
If you send a limited cease-comm letter to a CA restricting contact to mail-only, but way outside of the validation period (very old debt, dunned for years without answering), do they still have to obey or are they free to pursue collections by phone since you didn't respond within 30 days?

Rottweiler

  • "SIT!" "Stay!" "Watch OUT!"
  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 6022
  • Talent does what it can; genius does what it must
    • Debtor Talk:  "Tough Love" for the Collection Industry.
Re: Limited cease comm
« Reply #1 on: September 10, 2009 01:22:52 AM »
1.) Yes, you can send them that letter; there is no time limit to invoke the "inconvenience clause". Just tell them "all phone calls are inconvenient, any time and any place". 

IMHO, that means voice-based phone service in ANY form, whether voice mail, VoIP, wireless phone, or vanilla "Ma Bell" service.

2.) Frankly, the additional restriction "contact by postal mail only" is obsolete since e-mail is, in fact, written communication, the Internet version of the letter in the mailbox.
 
So are chat rooms and other social networking programs (including a board like this one) as proxy for newspapers, typewritten discourse, and bulletin boards).

Ditto for text messaging.

Therefore all of these conceivably could be permitted was for the debt collector to communicate with the consumer debtor when the "inconvenience clause" is invoked.
However, under further analysis, the chat room/social networking media are written but would violate any or all of the following FDCPA clauses: §804(4) [communication by post card prohibited]; §805(b) [communication with third parties prohibited];§806 in general [harassment or abuse prohibited];§808 in general [unfair practices prohibited].

3.) The new electronic "TTD/TTY"--IP Relay--uses the Internet and VoIP protocol and comes out, of course, as text.  This page from the FCC website explains further:
http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/iprelay.html

Quote
IP Relay allows people who have difficulty hearing or speaking to communicate through the telephone system with hearing persons. IP Relay is accessed using a computer and the Internet.... So individuals who use IP Relay do not need to invest in a TTY; they simply use the computer to communicate by text....

Unlike traditional TRS,...the first leg of an IP Relay call goes from the caller’s computer, or other Web-enabled device, to the IP Relay Center via the Internet. The IP Relay Center is usually accessed via a Web page. The second leg of the call, as with traditional TRS, is from the CA to the receiving party via voice telephone through the public switched telephone network.

There are no additional costs to consumers for IP Relay beyond a computer or other Web-capable device and an Internet connection.

IP Relay, as traditional TTY service, is really a hybrid of text and voice messaging that does, at some point, travel over phone lines. Whether the use of IP Relay to communicate between a debt collector and a debtor with a hearing or speech impairment constitutes written or phone communication as defined or implied in the FDCPA and case law may be legally yet unsettled.

IMHO, I'd treat it as voice and hence covered by the "inconvenience clause", but I need to research this question further.

I don't know how TTD/TTY is classified for FDCPA purposes.  There may well be case law on this one that treats it as voice.  As a reasonable substitute for audio phone service for those who need it, I would say the inconvenience clause applies although the result is text.

Again, more research is needed to confirm if this is indeed the case.

“This is a court of law, young man, not a court of justice."
~ Olver Wendell Holmes

Rottweiler

  • "SIT!" "Stay!" "Watch OUT!"
  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 6022
  • Talent does what it can; genius does what it must
    • Debtor Talk:  "Tough Love" for the Collection Industry.
Re: Limited cease comm
« Reply #2 on: September 10, 2009 01:24:44 AM »
If you send a limited cease-comm letter to a CA restricting contact to mail-only, but way outside of the validation period (very old debt, dunned for years without answering), do they still have to obey or are they free to pursue collections by phone since you didn't respond within 30 days?

Another way to deal with this is to send them a FOAD letter.  No time limit for sending the CA that, either, per the FDCPA.   ;D
“This is a court of law, young man, not a court of justice."
~ Olver Wendell Holmes

decamp

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 267
Re: Limited cease comm
« Reply #3 on: September 10, 2009 03:30:36 AM »
Another way to deal with this is to send them a FOAD letter.  No time limit for sending the CA that, either, per the FDCPA.   ;D

 ;D
It may come to that later if other means of dealing with them fail.

I was mostly wondering because I had sent them a "no telephone, in writing only" notice over a month ago.

They've called 6 times since then and I've got photos of the Caller ID. Just sent them a copy of those along with my pre-ITS, giving them one more chance to settle before it goes legal.

They also demanded more money than their own paperwork says is due for another even older debt, and 'suggested' in that dunning that it would be reported, even though it's over 7 years from delinquency.

I just wanted to be sure that limited cease-comm still applies even though I missed the window for validation/cease-collection because it's so old. 6 times is no error, want to nail them for it.

Thanks for the extra info, I was wondering about email and such.

Rottweiler

  • "SIT!" "Stay!" "Watch OUT!"
  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 6022
  • Talent does what it can; genius does what it must
    • Debtor Talk:  "Tough Love" for the Collection Industry.
Re: Limited cease comm
« Reply #4 on: September 10, 2009 02:20:03 PM »
Thanks for the extra info, I was wondering about email and such.

Keep in mind that what I post is only my opinion and is not legal advice on the subject.
“This is a court of law, young man, not a court of justice."
~ Olver Wendell Holmes

decamp

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 267
Re: Limited cease comm
« Reply #5 on: September 10, 2009 08:53:18 PM »
Omg this CA is DUMB. They just called again, the day of receiving my pre-ITS stating they have violated the FDCPA by calling this residence 6 times since receiving a DO NOT CALL/LIMITED CEASE-COMM, as well as notice of a few other violations, and they had better show intent to settle within 10 days.

They must not have ever read the FDCPA.

Rottweiler

  • "SIT!" "Stay!" "Watch OUT!"
  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 6022
  • Talent does what it can; genius does what it must
    • Debtor Talk:  "Tough Love" for the Collection Industry.
Re: Limited cease comm
« Reply #6 on: September 10, 2009 09:14:14 PM »
Do you mean these guys just got the ITS TODAY, and they have called six times TODAY??

“This is a court of law, young man, not a court of justice."
~ Olver Wendell Holmes

decamp

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 267
Re: Limited cease comm
« Reply #7 on: September 10, 2009 09:20:22 PM »
Do you mean these guys just got the ITS TODAY, and they have called six times TODAY??

6 times since getting the limited cease-comm/in-writing-only weeks ago (and an email REMINDER to the office administrator since then), and one call today. It went into their PO box so they got it late this morning probably.


 

credit