Does this have any weight? CORRECTION 209 cmr 18:17 (11)

[Anonymous]

Thoughts anyone?

Massachusetts 209 cmr 18:17 (11).  seems to prohibit a debt collector from reporting to a CRA in its own name.

"For a debt collector to report to a consumer reporting agency on its transactions or experiences with a consumer in the debt collector's name. However, a debt collector may, with the express written authorization of the creditor, report to a consumer reporting agency in the creditor's name."

In Massachusetts a debt collector can not report to a credit reporting agency in its own name. The regulations of the Massachusetts Division of Banks state that it is unlawful “For a debt collector to report to a consumer reporting agency on its transactions or experiences with a consumer in the debt collector’s name. However, a debt collector may, with the express written authorization of the creditor, report to a consumer reporting agency in the creditor’s name.” 209 Code Mass. Regs 18.17(11). Therefore, in Massachusetts if you have a trade line in your credit report from a debt collector, the debt collector has violated the law. There is an interesting issue related to debt buyers. Companies who buy defaulted debts from creditors are considered “debt collectors” under both state and federal law. The regulation suggests that a debt buyer can never report to credit reporting agencies because it can not do so in its own name and it also can not do so in the name of the original creditor because the consumer no longer owes a debt to that creditor. Any statement to the contrary would be false and therefore a violation of both federal and Massachusetts debt collection laws.

[Anonymous]

Bump

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Thoughts anyone?

Massachusetts 209 cmr 18:17 (11).  seems to prohibit a debt collector from reporting to a CRA in its own name.

"For a debt collector to report to a consumer reporting agency on its transactions or experiences with a consumer in the debt collector's name. However, a debt collector may, with the express written authorization of the creditor, report to a consumer reporting agency in the creditor's name."

In Massachusetts a debt collector can not report to a credit reporting agency in its own name. The regulations of the Massachusetts Division of Banks state that it is unlawful “For a debt collector to report to a consumer reporting agency on its transactions or experiences with a consumer in the debt collector’s name. However, a debt collector may, with the express written authorization of the creditor, report to a consumer reporting agency in the creditor’s name.” 209 Code Mass. Regs 18.17(11). Therefore, in Massachusetts if you have a trade line in your credit report from a debt collector, the debt collector has violated the law. There is an interesting issue related to debt buyers. Companies who buy defaulted debts from creditors are considered “debt collectors” under both state and federal law. The regulation suggests that a debt buyer can never report to credit reporting agencies because it can not do so in its own name and it also can not do so in the name of the original creditor because the consumer no longer owes a debt to that creditor. Any statement to the contrary would be false and therefore a violation of both federal and Massachusetts debt collection laws.

---

I would try to find some court cases that have clarified what the law means.

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Thoughts anyone?

Massachusetts 209 cmr 18:17 (11).  seems to prohibit a debt collector from reporting to a CRA in its own name.

"For a debt collector to report to a consumer reporting agency on its transactions or experiences with a consumer in the debt collector's name. However, a debt collector may, with the express written authorization of the creditor, report to a consumer reporting agency in the creditor's name."

In Massachusetts a debt collector can not report to a credit reporting agency in its own name. The regulations of the Massachusetts Division of Banks state that it is unlawful “For a debt collector to report to a consumer reporting agency on its transactions or experiences with a consumer in the debt collector’s name. However, a debt collector may, with the express written authorization of the creditor, report to a consumer reporting agency in the creditor’s name.” 209 Code Mass. Regs 18.17(11). Therefore, in Massachusetts if you have a trade line in your credit report from a debt collector, the debt collector has violated the law. There is an interesting issue related to debt buyers. Companies who buy defaulted debts from creditors are considered “debt collectors” under both state and federal law. The regulation suggests that a debt buyer can never report to credit reporting agencies because it can not do so in its own name and it also can not do so in the name of the original creditor because the consumer no longer owes a debt to that creditor. Any statement to the contrary would be false and therefore a violation of both federal and Massachusetts debt collection laws.

---

I would try to find some court cases that have clarified what the law means.

---

Norman, not sure if consumers are aware. It clearly states this as a violation.

209 CMR: DIVISION OF BANKS AND LOAN AGENCIES 209 CMR 18.00:

Conduct of the Business of Debt Collectors and Loan Servicers

Massachusetts 209 cmr 18:17 (11)

A debt collector may not use unfair or unconscionable means to collect or attempt to collect any debt. Without limiting the general application of the foregoing, the following conduct is a violation of 209 CMR 18.17:

(11) For a debt collector to report to a consumer reporting agency on its transactions or experiences with a consumer in the debt collector's name. However, a debt collector may, with the express written authorization of the creditor, report to a consumer reporting agency in the creditor's name.

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Thoughts anyone?

Massachusetts 209 cmr 18:17 (11).  seems to prohibit a debt collector from reporting to a CRA in its own name.

"For a debt collector to report to a consumer reporting agency on its transactions or experiences with a consumer in the debt collector's name. However, a debt collector may, with the express written authorization of the creditor, report to a consumer reporting agency in the creditor's name."

In Massachusetts a debt collector can not report to a credit reporting agency in its own name. The regulations of the Massachusetts Division of Banks state that it is unlawful “For a debt collector to report to a consumer reporting agency on its transactions or experiences with a consumer in the debt collector’s name. However, a debt collector may, with the express written authorization of the creditor, report to a consumer reporting agency in the creditor’s name.” 209 Code Mass. Regs 18.17(11). Therefore, in Massachusetts if you have a trade line in your credit report from a debt collector, the debt collector has violated the law. There is an interesting issue related to debt buyers. Companies who buy defaulted debts from creditors are considered “debt collectors” under both state and federal law. The regulation suggests that a debt buyer can never report to credit reporting agencies because it can not do so in its own name and it also can not do so in the name of the original creditor because the consumer no longer owes a debt to that creditor. Any statement to the contrary would be false and therefore a violation of both federal and Massachusetts debt collection laws.

---

I would try to find some court cases that have clarified what the law means.

---

Norman, not sure if consumers are aware. It clearly states this as a violation.

209 CMR: DIVISION OF BANKS AND LOAN AGENCIES 209 CMR 18.00:

Conduct of the Business of Debt Collectors and Loan Servicers

Massachusetts 209 cmr 18:17 (11)

A debt collector may not use unfair or unconscionable means to collect or attempt to collect any debt. Without limiting the general application of the foregoing, the following conduct is a violation of 209 CMR 18.17:

(11) For a debt collector to report to a consumer reporting agency on its transactions or experiences with a consumer in the debt collector's name. However, a debt collector may, with the express written authorization of the creditor, report to a consumer reporting agency in the creditor's name.

---

Here is the part that I question - "on its transactions or experiences with a consumer". Is simply reporting that they have collection authority for a debt considered "its transactions or experiences with the consumer"? On its face, I would take that to mean the reporting of monthly late payments, but I could be wrong.

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Thoughts anyone?

Massachusetts 209 cmr 18:17 (11).  seems to prohibit a debt collector from reporting to a CRA in its own name.

"For a debt collector to report to a consumer reporting agency on its transactions or experiences with a consumer in the debt collector's name. However, a debt collector may, with the express written authorization of the creditor, report to a consumer reporting agency in the creditor's name."

In Massachusetts a debt collector can not report to a credit reporting agency in its own name. The regulations of the Massachusetts Division of Banks state that it is unlawful “For a debt collector to report to a consumer reporting agency on its transactions or experiences with a consumer in the debt collector’s name. However, a debt collector may, with the express written authorization of the creditor, report to a consumer reporting agency in the creditor’s name.” 209 Code Mass. Regs 18.17(11). Therefore, in Massachusetts if you have a trade line in your credit report from a debt collector, the debt collector has violated the law. There is an interesting issue related to debt buyers. Companies who buy defaulted debts from creditors are considered “debt collectors” under both state and federal law. The regulation suggests that a debt buyer can never report to credit reporting agencies because it can not do so in its own name and it also can not do so in the name of the original creditor because the consumer no longer owes a debt to that creditor. Any statement to the contrary would be false and therefore a violation of both federal and Massachusetts debt collection laws.

---

I would try to find some court cases that have clarified what the law means.

---

Norman, not sure if consumers are aware. It clearly states this as a violation.

209 CMR: DIVISION OF BANKS AND LOAN AGENCIES 209 CMR 18.00:

Conduct of the Business of Debt Collectors and Loan Servicers

Massachusetts 209 cmr 18:17 (11)

A debt collector may not use unfair or unconscionable means to collect or attempt to collect any debt. Without limiting the general application of the foregoing, the following conduct is a violation of 209 CMR 18.17:

(11) For a debt collector to report to a consumer reporting agency on its transactions or experiences with a consumer in the debt collector's name. However, a debt collector may, with the express written authorization of the creditor, report to a consumer reporting agency in the creditor's name.

---

Here is the part that I question - "on its transactions or experiences with a consumer". Is simply reporting that they have collection authority for a debt considered "its transactions or experiences with the consumer"? On its face, I would take that to mean the reporting of monthly late payments, but I could be wrong.

---

If I paid the debt collector doesn't that create a "transaction" and an "experience"?

[Anonymous]

Robert?

[RobertEG]

I would agree with Norman.

The quoted section of the Mass code is:

"Massachusetts 209 CMR 18:17 (11)

A debt collector may not use unfair or unconscionable means to collect or attempt to collect any debt. Without limiting the general application of the foregoing, the following conduct is a violation of 209 CMR 18.17:

(11) For a debt collector to report to a consumer reporting agency on its transactions or experiences with a consumer in the debt collector's name. However, a debt collector may, with the express written authorization of the creditor, report to a consumer reporting agency in the creditor's name."

I have never seen case law that interprets any banket exclusion of debt collectors in Mass reporting to a CRA.

I would not interpret the quoted section to mean that a debt collector cannot report

The code does not end with the prohibition of reporting to a CRA, it goes on to quality the prohibition as limited to transactions or experiences with a consuemr in the debt collector's name.  What that means is subject to interpretation, which could, as Norman suggested, by the reporting of transactions with a consumer.  The clarifying next sentence implies that interpretation, as it states that there is no prohibition if the transaction is reported under name or consent of the creditor.

A debt collector who simply reports their collection is not reporting upon transactions in their name with the consumr, they are reporting the fact that they have collection authority.  They need not ever had any transactions with the consumer, whatever that means.

I would presume that it means billing or other related transactions, such as delinquencies.

In the absense of any case law interpretation, and more importantly, the presence of rights under the Federal FCRA to report to a CRA, I would only consider the ciited statute to have the broad interpretation of preventng any reporting to a CRA if precedential case law by a Mass appellate court were cited.

[Anonymous]

I have two paid collections on my reports. I am going to attempt to see how this pans out by filing a complaint with the CFPB on both CA's.

[RobertEG]

The CFPB does not have authority to admininter Mass state law, so doubt they will have any jurisdiction to offer any sanctions.

I would send any complaint to the Mass AG.

In the absence of any precedential case law, and with the presence of years and years of debt collectors in Mass regularly reporting to the CRAs, more than a laymen intepretation would likely be needed to support any such complaint.