This is true. I should have said “no legal ways to get an unlisted phone number”.
The best illegal way to get an unlisted phone number is cable skiptracing. I never did this, but can imagine how effective it would be.
Everybody loves TV. So, even the scumbag debtors who don’t pay most bills anymore still pay for cable usually. The collector has the social security # of the debtor as well as addresses and other data. They can use this information to trick the cable company that they are the debtor. They then fool the cable company into “verifying” the current address and phone number for the debtor.
Assuming that you are correct and nearby messages are illegal, collectors that didn’t care about the law and wanted to find debtors wouldn’t bother with nearby messages. They would just be cable skipping all day long. It is certainly more effective. But, believe it or not, most collectors don’t break the law like this.
I would treat debtors proffessionally clairobscur. Just because I am venting about scumbag debtors in this thread here in the BBQ pit of the dope boards doesn’t mean that I would speak to people on the phone the same way.
I work with databases now. I enjoy doing it. But, every once in a while you might see me post a pit thread with some choice words about my computer when it’s not doing what I want it to. This doesn’t mean I am not a good systems analyst.
The same thing can be said about collections. I think some people in this thread are coming down harder on me than your usual pit poster because they are debtors. They have anger towards collections and credit in general and see the truth in what I say.
Most debtors, in my experience are scumbags. I haven’t seen anything in this thread to disprove that. Otto states that he was using his cards to pull out cash advances to pay his rent. He would also use this money to pay the minimum payments! This is outragously unresponsible behavior. He uses it as examples of his “innocence”. It sucks that he lost his job, but I don’t see how it justifies him fucking over his creditors with such abandon. lezlers story is similar in the sense that she made admittedly stupid decisions to get herself in trouble.
I am thinking bdgrfuck is probably another scumbag debtor with and axe to grind.
These attacks of his/hers are way over the top. I mean, this stuff really comes from the third grade.
After finding out I am male, s/he starts calling me an feminine version of my username. :rolleyes: I don’t know if this is supposed to be more insulting to me or to women in general. Either way it’s just childish.
And then this I must not have friends and / or all my friends must be scumbags stuff. It’s really rather silly.
I have dealt with the interesting legal issues you have brought up in good faith. Unlike the others, you don’t seem interested in discussion about these issues. You seem simply interested in using any shred of weakness from my posts to slam me with. Since I have been posting what I believe for four pages you have plenty of ammo to use against me. However, you haven’t said anything about yourself so I am left rather unarmed. I could go on about how you don’t have any friends and like to fuck donkeys whilst wearing a clown suit on the weekend’s but that would just be silly. :wally
No Debbie, you see, You started with the person insults in this thread…Not that i need that because this is the pit, but you did start it. The Debbie is directed at your sensitivity at the spelling of your name.
And I have provided you with cites about the dsicussion at hand, and you have been absolutely unable to bring up anything in defense of your position or your previous illegal activity. You see, you brought this on yourself. YOu came in here being all judgmental about people, calling them scumbags, and insulting them, so I figured you should have a little of that in return.
And by your definition, no I am not a scumbag debtor.
The childish insults were more of the same you felt so free to dish out…
It’s clear that consumer credit laws in the US are somewhat different to those here, so I’d like to ask a question. Is there any legal requirement that the creditor try to negotiate a repayment agreement with the debtor before outsourcing the debt to a collection agency? The reason I ask is because if a debtor here makes a reasonable attempt to resolve the issue and the creditor refuses to negotiate, the creditor will most likely be at a huge disadvantage if the issue ever reaches court.
One reason people here are sometimes unwilling to try to negotiate with creditors when a problem first arises is because when the creditor becomes aware that there is a financial problem they will very often scale back or suspend the debtor’s current service (switching the phone service to local or incoming calls only, for instance). This is a perfectly reasonable action on the part of the service provider (and also prevents the customer from acquiring a larger debt), but very often the customer wants to continue using the service freely and so doesn’t take any action to negotiate a repayment arrangement until the service has been terminated for non-payment. It isn’t exactly ethical behaviour on the part of a customer to continue using a service they are no longer able to pay for until that service is terminated for non-payment, yet it’s surprisingly common behaviour amongst people experiencing financial difficulties.
Sigh I’ve greatly slowed down my posts to this thread because I truly think that there is no hope left for you. You are going to continue being a small minded, judgemental, bigoted asshole no matter what anyone says to you. Otto did what he had to do to survive. Are you actually saying he should’ve just not paid his rent and lived on the street? You’re quick to tell people what they shouldn’t have done, but never seem to have an alternative for them. What should he have done instead? Hmm?
Must’ve been nice to come home after a day of abusing “scumbag debtors” (the repeated use of this term in the manner you use it is quite the passive aggressive manuver) and sit in your cushy condo that you could just refinance the minute you got faced with some financial woes. Not all of us have that option.
Basically, unless you’ve experienced severe financial difficulties, to the point of being a step away from living on the street, you need to shut the fuck up. :wally
This exact situation happened with AT&T. When the 900-number charges first appeared on my bill (in September 2001, as I recall), I called AT&T and spoke to several representatives. The original $140 charge was knocked down to $70, and I was assured that the $70 would be coming off my bill in the next billing cycle. When it still appeared, I called again and was told I had to talk to the 900-number division, since the charge originated from there. A couple of rounds of phone calls ensued, during which I was twice informed that the $70 charge was being removed. In January 2002, AT&T suspended my long-distance service for non-payment. The only thing not paid was the $70; all other long-distance charges were paid each month.