The collection agencies’ active participation in collecting debts from the vulnerable debtors in the US has increased in the recent years. These agencies employ illegal means to collect debt from the borrowers.

1. Debt collection agencies that violate the FDCP Act
The collection agencie's active participation in collecting debts from the
vulnerable debtors in the US has increased in the recent years. These agencies
employ illegal means to collect debt from the borrowers. With the rising
complaint of the victims the federal law has been forced to implement Fair
Debt Collection Practice Act to prevent creditor harassment. According to the
FDCPA, the debt collectors are forbidden from illegal collection practices, using
abusive language, threatening calls to the debtors and so on.
Here are some instances how these collection agencies have violated the FDCP
Act.
The owner of the Legal Action Recovery, a professional debt collection firm,
violated the FDCPA rule. The firm threatened the debtors to pay off debt.
However, at that time these victims didn’t even owe the debt as it had been
discharged in bankruptcy procedure and passed the statute of limitations. The
debt collectors even warned the debtors of taking legal action if the payments
are not made within time. The firm even masqueraded as law enforcement
officers to pressurize the victims to clear their payment of the delinquent
account.
The owner tried to operate his firms from prison and corresponded with his
staffs regarding the account management and personnel issues. He was always
updated about his banking activities. So, the New York Attorney General’s
Office has lodged charges against the owner continuing to operate the firm.
Charges have been filed against Buffalo, NY collection agency operated by
Tobias Boyland, known as Bags of Money, for creditor harassment. Boyland’s
debt collectors violated the state as well as federal law disguising as law
enforcement officials. Most consumers gave in to the demands of the collection
agency as they were threatened of being arrested on failing to make their
payments. The collection agency has been found claiming for non-existent
debts. This agency even tried to collect payments after the passing of the
statute of limitations or overstated the amount owed on the actual debt. The
intimidated debtors usually make payments to avoid further harassment and
humiliation. The company used to provide wrong contact information to make
the consumers believe that the businesses were located far from the Buffalo
area.
California’s Bad Check Diversion Act (BCDA) empowers a district lawyer to
sign a contract with a private body to run a diversion program for poor check
writers. The company District Attorney Technical Services Inc had an
agreement with various district attorneys' offices to offer collection services to
merchants who were offered with bad checks. The CEO of District Attorney
Technical Services Inc. (DATS) was found personally liable for violating
FDCPA. He was involved in collection practices and the firm’s only source of
income was its collection activities based on the contract that he negotiated
with the district attorneys' offices. This firm even collected fee that was not
authorized by the Bad Check Diversion Act (BCDA). The court was informed

2. that the collection letter stated that legal action and arrest warrants will be
issued for individuals who are unable to pay on time. But DATS never
bothered to present the file before the district attorney's office. Therefore, the
firm violated the FDCP Act and had to face the consequences.
Continental Central Credit (CCC) collected delinquent accounts for The
Association for Maintenance Fees. CCC charges 40% on all debtors account
after the money is retrieved from them. The collection agency sent second
collection notice less than 30 days after sending the first notice thus violating
the FDCPA rule implemented by the Federal Trade Commission. The
debtor bought a class against the CCC for violating the Act. The debtor had 30
days to dispute the validity of the debt from the initial correspondence from
the debt collectors. So, this is also considered to be a threatening tactic as the
susceptible debtors might think that if they are unable to make the payment it
might lead to some legal action.
So these are the four amongst many other debt collection agencies that have
violated the FDCP Act and had to pay for the consequences for illegitimate
debt collection practices.
Disclaimer: This information is not intended as legal advice. Please direct your specific
questions to K&M attorneys and know more about your FDCPA rights. If you want to pursue
your FDCPA claim, call @ 1-800-877-3666 toll free, to reach Krohn & Moss for your FREE
CASE REVIEW Or submit your information online for your free case evaluation @
http://www.westopdebtcollectors.com