FDCPA and inspections........ - REO Property Preservation Forum
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 16 (permalink) Old 06-20-2015, 02:58 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,403
Thanks: 1,518
Thanked 533 Times in 287 Posts
FDCPA and inspections........

SOOOO many ways to get in hot water here. FDCPA does NOT mess around. W/O says if occupied and nobody home, Leave callback card in envelope marked "confidential" Well now what happens if property is tenant occupied and the tenant gets the CC? Instructions say DO NOT leave CC with tenant! Also per FDCPA the door hangers fail to identify who is responsible for the notice, neglecting to mention that it pertained to collection of a debt, default, or demand for payment.

The FDCPA mandates debt collectors identify themselves to those from whom they are collecting and to disclose the reason for contacting the individual. Additionally, the FDCPA requires all debt collectors to mail the debtor a specific letter within five days of initial communication, notifying the debtor of their legal rights to obtain validation of the debt, including total amount owed, the creditor’s name, and how to dispute the debt.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	confidential.jpg
Views:	106
Size:	65.1 KB
ID:	1714  

Click image for larger version

Name:	confidentail2.jpg
Views:	107
Size:	30.3 KB
ID:	1722  

mtmtnman is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 16 (permalink) Old 06-20-2015, 08:10 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 666
Thanks: 124
Thanked 336 Times in 182 Posts
Not to mention all the state laws

It is a legal nightmare, additionally you are soliciting and may need a local permit for that. I would advise against anyone doing occupancy inspections that require contact or postings. All it would take is one complaint from someone who is already probably not too happy out the situation.
Ohnojim is offline  
post #3 of 16 (permalink) Old 06-21-2015, 01:07 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 136
Thanks: 197
Thanked 95 Times in 57 Posts
GOTTA use common sense. Put the intended recipients name on the envelope as well, that covers you on that aspect.

As for the letter to be sent 5 days later: "(c) A debt collector may not be held liable in any action brought under this title if the debt collector shows by a preponderance of evidence that the violation was not intentional and resulted from a bona fide error notwithstanding the maintenance of procedures reasonably adapted to avoid any such error."
Field Audit Services LLC is offline  
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Field Audit Services LLC For This Useful Post:
PPPrincessNOT (06-21-2015), thanohano44 (07-03-2015)
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 16 (permalink) Old 06-22-2015, 06:25 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,403
Thanks: 1,518
Thanked 533 Times in 287 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Field Audit Services LLC View Post
GOTTA use common sense. Put the intended recipients name on the envelope as well, that covers you on that aspect.

As for the letter to be sent 5 days later: "(c) A debt collector may not be held liable in any action brought under this title if the debt collector shows by a preponderance of evidence that the violation was not intentional and resulted from a bona fide error notwithstanding the maintenance of procedures reasonably adapted to avoid any such error."

I'll let the courts decide that one............
mtmtnman is offline  
post #5 of 16 (permalink) Old 06-22-2015, 06:56 PM
G 3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 210
Thanks: 255
Thanked 145 Times in 85 Posts
I've done these before. The "Confidential Letter" does not offer any information regarding the loan, or what the issue is, so there are no legal problems here. You post a letter asking the "Borrower" to call the mortgage company back. When someone calls the number in the letter, that caller will go through a screening process to make sure that they are the person the mortgage company needs to talk to. When the caller can't answer the questions, they are politely told that since they are not the borrower, no information can be given out. Please refer this letter to the borrower, and have them give us a call.

Some of these jobs are easy, some have a crap ton of questions that the bank wants you to ask the borrower.
G 3 is offline  
post #6 of 16 (permalink) Old 06-22-2015, 07:54 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 666
Thanks: 124
Thanked 336 Times in 182 Posts
If there was some money in them, I might look at it differently. But for the money generally offered for these, and all the paperwork generally involved. I'm not taking the chance of some halfwit filing a complaint.
Ohnojim is offline  
post #7 of 16 (permalink) Old 06-23-2015, 12:19 AM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,403
Thanks: 1,518
Thanked 533 Times in 287 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by G 3 View Post
I've done these before. The "Confidential Letter" does not offer any information regarding the loan, or what the issue is, so there are no legal problems here. You post a letter asking the "Borrower" to call the mortgage company back. When someone calls the number in the letter, that caller will go through a screening process to make sure that they are the person the mortgage company needs to talk to. When the caller can't answer the questions, they are politely told that since they are not the borrower, no information can be given out. Please refer this letter to the borrower, and have them give us a call.

Some of these jobs are easy, some have a crap ton of questions that the bank wants you to ask the borrower.

Did you read the court cases? Obviously a judge thought there was some merit as he gave it class action status.....
mtmtnman is offline  
post #8 of 16 (permalink) Old 06-23-2015, 02:10 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 136
Thanks: 197
Thanked 95 Times in 57 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtmtnman View Post
I'll let the courts decide that one............
Wait a second here..You post about the FDCPA and going to jail and that is fact. I post about FDCPA WITH fact and all I get is a "I'll let the courts decide that one"? WTH, man? Why is it good for the goose but not the gander?

Quote:
Did you read the court cases? Obviously a judge thought there was some merit as he gave it class action status...
To which case (or cases, you said both) are you referring to, my friend? And did you read the FDCPA? Seems you are trying to make a mountain out of a molehill here. I've had complaints; can't please everyone all the time; and they have stopped there. As a complaint that was resolved. No courts. No judges. No FDCPA.

Not sure what case (or cases) you are using as examples, but I gather from being a class action suit, it was widespread company policy to be disrespectful to the debtor. That is one company, not an industry. And a class action suit doesn't arise from leaving a letter marked 'Confidential' on the front door, as there's more to the story than you know, me thinks.
Field Audit Services LLC is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to Field Audit Services LLC For This Useful Post:
G 3 (06-23-2015)
post #9 of 16 (permalink) Old 06-23-2015, 11:23 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: nowheresville Illinois
Posts: 155
Thanks: 770
Thanked 125 Times in 66 Posts
We did an eviction for a realtor last summer... In this particular county the sheriff sends 6 officers. They knock once then ram the door. So they ram the door and the renter comes out in his tighty whities and starts screaming all confused. The sheriff and the renter and the realtor determine he has a signed lease and tell him he needs to contact his landlord. And we pack up to leave. (there is now a circus of neighbors looking on most with phones videoing He (very nicely) asks if he needs to contact his landlord about the now broken front door.
The only female officer literally runs up to him and starts screaming "If you paid your effing bills you wouldn't have a broken door you effing deadbeat"

We were all stunned.. Probably the only time in my life I was speechless. LOL the renters neighbor walks up says hes an attorney does Bk's and what not and tells the renter he will go pro bono and sue the officer for violating the FDCPA and slander or libel whichever it is.
We talked to the realtor the officer AND the dept were getting sued... don't know more then that.

Wont mess with any of that crap... to easy to get sued..

M
PPPrincessNOT is offline  
post #10 of 16 (permalink) Old 06-24-2015, 12:32 AM
Senior Member
 
JoeInPI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 342
Thanks: 499
Thanked 201 Times in 114 Posts
Agreed- service papers and evictions- not anymore.
JoeInPI is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the REO Property Preservation Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome