866-902-3451 CBCS

[Anonymous]

I have a message on my machine

"This is an attempt to collect a debt.  any information obtained will be used for that purpose, please call Mary Normand back at CBCS today"

Umm I think that is a collection violation. 

Anyone ever get this type of collection call?

[llecs]

We used to get them all the time. We have 2 active collections, one is past SOL and CRTP. That one is FNCB and they leave daily messages nearly exact to the one you posted.

I don't think it is a violation. Now if they call you over and over without sending a dunning letter then they are in violation of the FDCPA.

[Anonymous]

I believe it is a violation to leave a collection message like this on an answering machine. 

I think they can say this is CBCS, please contact immediately about an urgent matter.

If I am not mistaken, I believe that saying this is about a debt collection on an answering machine is a violation.

I recall reading somewhere that you cannot leave such a message since you don't know who might have access to that answering machine and what harm might be caused by such a message.

Message Edited by JimmyMagno on 03-28-2008 01:03 PM

[Anonymous]

Just b/c a CA is calling, doesn't mean you are a deadbeat.

I don't believe they have violated FDCPA in anyway, but I could be wrong. A lot of the FDCPA is based on how you interpret it.

[Anonymous]

I work at a collection agency currently and they probably said that because they don't want you to just delete the message thinking it's a telemarketer.  We get that all the time; people not returning our calls because they think we solicitors.

[Anonymous]

Generally, messages are like this:

This is an important call for Karen Black, this is not a telemarketing call, please call us back at 1-800-234-5678 before 5 pm today.

I will research and post more info.

[Anonymous]

---

JimmyMagno wrote:

Generally, messages are like this:

This is an important call for Karen Black, this is not a telemarketing call, please call us back at 1-800-234-5678 before 5 pm today.

I will research and post more info.

---

But then, aren't they in violation for not including the "Mini Miranda" (this is an attempt to collect a debt, etc etc) in a communication, which they are required to do?

Seems like they're not allowed to leave messages stating that they're debt collectors due to third party disclosure, but they're also not allowed to leave messages NOT stating they're debt collectors due to the Mini Miranda requirement.

Wow.  It must suck to be a CA.

Edited to add: I am positive that I have read that this whole answering machine/third-party disclosure/mini-Miranda issue has been hashed out in the courts, but I don't remember what the outcome was.  Maybe someone who has the resources can try to find out for us?

Message Edited by cheddar on 03-28-2008 04:30 PM

[Anonymous]

cheddar, that is my point exactly:

"For example, FDCPA requires collectors to identify themselves and to state that they are calling to collect a debt. Many courts have called this the "mini-Miranda warning." The law also generally requires collectors to refrain from communicating with third parties about the debt.
While these requirements appear reasonable on the surface, they are incompatible when collectors encounter a debtor's answering machine, as the collector may end up violating the act regardless of whether they leave the mini-Miranda.
Courts have consistently held that a collector who omits the warning violates FDCPA. At the same time, if the collector provides the mini-Miranda, he risks violating the FDCPA if the debtor's spouse or some other third party overhears the message."
http://www.allbusiness.com/legal/banking-law-credit-regulation/5845493-1.html

[ngerasimatos]

You cannot voluntarily release information to anyone else other than the responsible party. Leaving a voicemail is in violation of your rights.

[llecs]

Good points. I still stand by my claim though. If a CA calls me, then they are calling me because I gave them my phone number through the OC. And it is my responsibility to prevent a 3rd party from hearing the message. It would be my duty to prevent others from hearing my messages via a passcode, phone security, etc. Now if that CA called and left a message with a third party, like family, neighbors, or my employer, then I'm sure we all agree that would be a violation.