# Fraudster Collection Agency has just called my fiance. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [December 16, 2004, 4:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fraudster-collection-agency-has-just-called-my-fiance/280088 "2004-12-16T04:07:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Moirai](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/96bed5/32.png) [@Moirai](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Moirai)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2004, 2:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fraudster-collection-agency-has-just-called-my-fiance/280088/21 "2004-12-16T14:06:17Z")
Lynn brought up a good point. Always CC the appropriate gov’t agency on all your correspondence (AG, whatever). ---
**Author:** ![GaWd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/f08c70/32.png) [@GaWd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GaWd)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2004, 2:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fraudster-collection-agency-has-just-called-my-fiance/280088/22 "2004-12-16T14:46:05Z")
> [@](#): > > This is a very good point and something I always try to stress, when dealing with collectors, deal with them through the mail only. Sam’s advise is not only good in CA, the request to stop calling made through the mail (I’d advise against faxing it, too many unscrupulous collectors will claim they never saw your fax) is a right across the United States through the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Because of obscene abuses by the collections industries in the 1970s, this act was put in place and seriously changed the way that collectors could conduct themselves. I work in legal, and we deal with faxes daily so I’ve kind of come up with mad FaX0r sKIlz. Honestly, I generally talk about my account with my collector, get a fax number, fax a letter, call before the end of the day to confirm. All the while, you collect fax confirmation pages and whatnot, and retain them until the dispute is settled. > [@](#): > > Lynn brought up a good point. Always CC the appropriate gov’t agency on all your correspondence (AG, whatever). Not that I like to publicly disagree with Lynn, but I wouldn’t “always” copy the AG or other government agency. In fact, unless there was a specific reason to do it, I’d never suggest this. You faxes and letters will just be wasted if you do so without formally taking steps to lodge a complaint with them. If you wish to add “cc: So and So of the State AG’s Office” to the bottom left of the letter, you’re welcome to do so. For the most part, the collectors will call your bluff because it’s not like they haven’t seen that before, and the AG or whomever doesn’t know you from adam and your correspondence will end up roundfiled. Instead I’d suggest always retaining a copy or all of your letters, sending priority mail(though expensive), and retaining fax confirmation pages. Later on, if the AG wants such documentation, you can provide copies. Sam ---
**Author:** ![Cat\_Whisperer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cat_whisperer/32/4839_2.png) [@Cat\_Whisperer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cat_Whisperer)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2004, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fraudster-collection-agency-has-just-called-my-fiance/280088/23 "2004-12-16T15:25:21Z")
> [@Jaade](#): > > \As Lynn stated, once a debt is so old, they cannot attempt to collect on it any longer. No **debt** can stay on your credit for more than 7 years. > \ I’m not too sure about this - if this is the case, why would anyone pay any debt, instead of just waiting seven years for it to become obsolete? Also, someone mentioned in the infamous “get out of child support free” thread that child support debts never go away. ---
**Author:** ![GaWd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/f08c70/32.png) [@GaWd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GaWd)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2004, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fraudster-collection-agency-has-just-called-my-fiance/280088/24 "2004-12-16T16:25:57Z")
> [@featherlou](#): > > I’m not too sure about this - if this is the case, why would anyone pay any debt, instead of just waiting seven years for it to become obsolete? Also, someone mentioned in the infamous “get out of child support free” thread that child support debts never go away. Child support debts never _do_ go away, as was mentioned in that thread. However, child support is not a debt, per se, and arrearages of child support can haunt you for the rest of your life. Jaade is correct, nothing can remain on your credit report longer than 7 years. Bankruptcies, judgements, bad debts, loans-doesn’t matter, your credit is “refreshed” constantly as notations approach 7 years of age. That’s why people are so quick to declare bankruptcy-after 7 years of being faithful on payments and rebuilding their credit, they can have a bankruptcy-free credit report. Also, as I mentioned, in the state of California at least, debts older than 4 years cannot be collected on. Sam ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2004, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fraudster-collection-agency-has-just-called-my-fiance/280088/25 "2004-12-16T16:45:57Z")
Featherlou, if they get a judgement against you, they can garnish your wages to get the money back, AND you have a black mark against your credit for 7 years. It’s really not 7 years either, that is the credit history timeframe. Each state has its own statute of limitations on debt, and even have different times for different kinds of debt. If it’s similar to a criminal statute of limitations (big if…) then you only get off if they don’t take action within the SoL, once sued and judged, the debt would hang around. ---
**Author:** ![GaWd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/f08c70/32.png) [@GaWd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GaWd)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2004, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fraudster-collection-agency-has-just-called-my-fiance/280088/26 "2004-12-16T17:09:17Z")
> [@](#): > > Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, this accurate information about your accounts can stay on your credit report for up to seven years…write-offs and late payment notations may stay on your credit report for seven years-a bankruptcy can stay on for up to ten\* and is a matter of public record as well. This means that in addition to having individual account notations, you will also have the notation of the bankruptcy listed separately on your credit report. What does this mean then, Cheesesteak? Notations can only hang around for 7 years after initially showing up, AFAIK. If you know differently, or if I’ve been misinterpretting the law, please set me straight. \*-probably up to 10 years depending on how long the bankruptcy takes to litigate and manage-JMHO, I’m not a debt collector, nor a consumer law legal professional. Sam ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2004, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fraudster-collection-agency-has-just-called-my-fiance/280088/27 "2004-12-16T17:31:58Z")
On your credit report, they can only show items of 7 years or less vintage (10 years for bankruptcy). However, whether or not you can be forced to pay, via wage garnishment for instance, is not bound by rules on credit history, they are bound by the individual state’s Statute of Limitations on debt. If the creditor obtains a judgement against you within the debt SoL, you are then responsible for the debt. The SoL only determines the timeframe under which the creditor can attempt collection and get a judgement. The judgement itself apparently has an entirely separate [SoL](http://www.cardreport.com/laws/judgement-sol.html). ---
**Author:** ![stretch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a6a055/32.png) [@stretch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/stretch)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2004, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fraudster-collection-agency-has-just-called-my-fiance/280088/28 "2004-12-16T17:33:35Z")
I believe some folks in the thread are misunderstanding the seven year debt drop-off. Bad debts stay on your credit for seven years after they are no longer bad debts (they have been discharged by payment or write-off). As long as you owe the money they can keep reporting the debt as uncollected. You own money until you pay it or it is written off. After that, it is reported as a bad debt for seven years, then it drops of your credit report. Bankruptcy stays on for 10 years after completion. If I incur a debt and don’t make payments for five years, it is reported as a bad debt during those five years. Let’s say I then convince the company to write it off as uncollectable; they write it off and for the next seven years they report that I didn’t pay them and they had to write off the debt. Finally, after 12 years, the debt will no longer be reported on my credit report. ---
**Author:** ![GaWd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/f08c70/32.png) [@GaWd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GaWd)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2004, 5:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fraudster-collection-agency-has-just-called-my-fiance/280088/29 "2004-12-16T17:34:14Z")
Oh, ok, so I wasn’t wrong, just reading your post wrong. Carry on… ---
**Author:** ![WaryEri](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/ea666f/32.png) [@WaryEri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WaryEri)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2004, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fraudster-collection-agency-has-just-called-my-fiance/280088/30 "2004-12-16T20:58:31Z")
Thanks for all the advice and “I was there (and it wasn’t the end of the world)” stories. Everyone telling me to chill out is right, of course. Things threatening my partner worry me all out of proportion to the real threat sometimes. God help me when I have kids. We’ll check his credit report to make absolutely sure that there’s no legimate debt they could be hunting, and the recording is going to go unanswered for now. He’s refusing to speak with them unless they catch him in person, in which case…we’ve got lots of lovely game plans laid out here and on the AG link to follow. I think I can put this back below US immigration and our ever-shifting wedding plans in my big list of things to worry about. Really, thank you everyone. I was wigging out, and now I’m not. I think I’ll try to allow a good 12 hours between initial panic and Pitting in the future, though. Just to make sure the sky really is falling before I start cursing helmut prices. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2004, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fraudster-collection-agency-has-just-called-my-fiance/280088/31 "2004-12-16T21:20:55Z")
Just one more anecdote to add to the No Reason To Panic pile: Last year I got a letter from an out-of-state collection agency demanding payment for an old utility bill. The company in question was an energy firm headquartered in Texas\*, with which we had never dealt. Anyway, all our utility bills from our Texas days had long been paid up in full. I sent a copy of the final bill and canceled check for the service in question and never heard back on the matter again. Of course it’s a good idea to do a followup check on your credit report. Which this thread has reminded me to do as well. \*Interestingly, the firm’s website brags that it is not under the jurisdiction of any Texas regulatory agencies. Wonder if that was a hint not to try complaining to the state about its practices… ---
**Author:** ![MEBuckner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mebuckner/32/2896_2.png) [@MEBuckner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MEBuckner)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2004, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fraudster-collection-agency-has-just-called-my-fiance/280088/32 "2004-12-16T21:46:01Z")
> [@Zoe](#): > > I would provide the link for you, but it is Acrobat so I can neither link nor copy. [Copying and pasting from Adobe Acrobat files](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5052545). ---
**Author:** ![Jaade](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/dfb087/32.png) [@Jaade](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jaade)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2004, 11:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fraudster-collection-agency-has-just-called-my-fiance/280088/33 "2004-12-16T23:42:27Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > \*Interestingly, the firm’s website brags that it is not under the jurisdiction of any Texas regulatory agencies. Wonder if that was a hint not to try complaining to the state about its practices… Texas is known as a debtor’s haven among collectors. The reason is that there are no wage garnishments for debts there, and basically, if a person lives in Texas and owes a DEBT (Not child support, a hot check, a warrant, etc) and they don’t mind it sitting on their credit for 7 years, the collectors basically have their hands tied. That might have something to do with their declarations. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2004, 1:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fraudster-collection-agency-has-just-called-my-fiance/280088/34 "2004-12-17T01:08:48Z")
> [@WaryEri](#): > > We’ll check his credit report to make absolutely sure that there’s no legimate debt they could be hunting, and the recording is going to go unanswered for now. He’s refusing to speak with them unless they catch him in person, in which case…we’ve got lots of lovely game plans laid out here and on the AG link to follow. I think I can put this back below US immigration and our ever-shifting wedding plans in my big list of things to worry about. Do you have any idea of how much they say it is? Unless it is a lot, they aren’t going to try to see him in person. I’m pretty sure they aren’t going to start proceedings unless they debt is significant. **Shodan** , these people call again and again, so just ignoring it doesn’t work. My wife got calls on a $30 charge from 8 years ago that the original credit card company agreed to remove. When the debt gets sold, the new people know nothing about agreements. I looked up some of the links given here, discovered that it was way older than the statute of limitations, called them up. The person said “humph, you still owe it,” but no calls since. (And it was not on my credit record during the intervening 8 years for some reason.) ---
**Author:** ![WaryEri](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/ea666f/32.png) [@WaryEri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WaryEri)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2004, 1:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fraudster-collection-agency-has-just-called-my-fiance/280088/35 "2004-12-17T01:15:26Z")
I meant get him in person as in a live person calling and him picking up. He’s just refusing to call them back when they leave vague messages about urgent business. ---
**Author:** ![Yeticus\_Rex](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/a698b9/32.png) [@Yeticus\_Rex](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yeticus_Rex)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2004, 2:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fraudster-collection-agency-has-just-called-my-fiance/280088/36 "2004-12-17T02:49:16Z")
> [@WaryEri](#): > > I He’s just refusing to call them back when they leave vague messages about urgent business. Especially those that are Nigerian in nature. ---
**Author:** ![Random](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/57b2e6/32.png) [@Random](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Random)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2004, 3:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fraudster-collection-agency-has-just-called-my-fiance/280088/37 "2004-12-17T03:42:23Z")
> [@Jaade](#): > > However, they can then directly proceed to garnish your wages if their letters do not have the desired affect, assuming that they are willing to go through the trouble > [@Jaade](#): > > Fuck off, I know what I am talking about. Actually, you don’t. “Directly” means without delay, without any intervening stops or steps. Summons, trial and judgment are rather important intervening procedures that the creditor must first follow. Due process is a constitutional requirement. Only if the debtor ignores the summons and blows off the trial is a garnishment available in any kind of uncontested way. > [@Jaade](#): > > I didn’t go through every single step of garnishing someone’s wages because A. It was almost one AM here, and B. If this debt isn’t valid, all of these details don’t mean a fucking thing to her. You’re not making sense. If the “debt isn’t valid”, that pesky little trial “detail” **is** a fairly important “thing” for the debtor. > [@](#): > > My point was that if someone tells the creditor to stop calling, and the letters they send have no effect, and the debt is great enough, AND if they live in a state where one’s wages can be garnished, they can and may begin these proceedings. It depends on all of these factors. You’re still not getting it. Garnishment proceedings cannot begin until there’s been a trial (or at least an opportunity for one) and a judgment. These are hardly details. The letter is a detail. Ignoring it has no particular legal significance. The letter in no way sets up (or is even a prerequisite for) a garnishment. > [@Jaade](#): > > Once a debt is so old, they cannot attempt to collect on it any longer. No debt can stay on your credit for more than 7 years. > > * * * > > basically, if a person lives in Texas and owes a DEBT (Not child support, a hot check, a warrant, etc) and they don’t mind it sitting on their credit for 7 years, the collectors basically have their hands tied. Wrong again. You are confusing two separate concepts. One is the length of time a debt may appear on a credit report. This is, indeed, 7 years. But it has nothing to do with how long a debtor may enforce a debt. That’s governed by different statutes of limitation, which vary by state, and also by type of debt. Limitations periods run from the date of default (sometimes a later event can reset the statute.) For example, in my state, the limitations period for most debts evidenced by a writing is 10 years. And once there’s a judgment, it can be enforced (with easily obtained renewals) for up to 20 years. I’m not a Texas attorney, but 4 years appears to be the relevant limitations period there, and judgments appear to be good for 10 years, not including renewals. So “sitting tight” for seven years in no way ties the creditor’s hands. ---
**Author:** ![Lynn\_Bodoni](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e47c2d/32.png) [@Lynn\_Bodoni](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lynn_Bodoni)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2004, 4:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fraudster-collection-agency-has-just-called-my-fiance/280088/38 "2004-12-17T04:01:06Z")
> [@GaWd](#): > > Not that I like to publicly disagree with Lynn, but I wouldn’t “always” copy the AG or other government agency. In fact, unless there was a specific reason to do it, I’d never suggest this. You faxes and letters will just be wasted if you do so without formally taking steps to lodge a complaint with them. > > If you wish to add “cc: So and So of the State AG’s Office” to the bottom left of the letter, you’re welcome to do so. For the most part, the collectors will call your bluff because it’s not like they haven’t seen that before, and the AG or whomever doesn’t know you from adam and your correspondence will end up roundfiled. > > Instead I’d suggest always retaining a copy or all of your letters, sending priority mail(though expensive), and retaining fax confirmation pages. Later on, if the AG wants such documentation, you can provide copies. > > Sam The reason I copied the FTC on the letter was because the compnay in question had already been fined at least once by the [FTC](http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2004/03/camco.htm), and I wanted CAMCO to realize that I knew what they were up to…that is, they were trying to get us to pay off a debt that we had already paid. While I wouldn’t advise copying the FTC in every instance, in this case I felt that it was appropriate. ---
**Author:** ![Jaade](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/dfb087/32.png) [@Jaade](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jaade)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2004, 7:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fraudster-collection-agency-has-just-called-my-fiance/280088/39 "2004-12-17T07:15:04Z")
> [@Random](#): > > Actually, you don’t. “Directly” means without delay, without any intervening stops or steps. Summons, trial and judgment are rather important intervening procedures that the creditor must first follow. Due process is a constitutional requirement. Only if the debtor ignores the summons and blows off the trial is a garnishment available in any kind of uncontested way. You are being obtuse. Show me where I said, if you don’t pay this bill today, they are going to take money out of your check on the 15th. When I said, IF THEY WANT TO GO THROUGH THE TROUBLE, I meant the trouble of getting a judgement against the debtor. I apologize for not spelling it out in those exact words, but I think my meaning was clear enough for the purposes of this thread. > [@](#): > > You’re not making sense. If the “debt isn’t valid”, that pesky little trial “detail” **is** a fairly important “thing” for the debtor. Again, I’m talking about THIS THREAD. See how you said “the debt”? I said “this debt”, Not a debt from a hypothetical debtor. Since the OP feels certain that no such debt exists, it’s unlikely there would ever be a trial, as the debt is (supposedly) not valid. So no, it’s not important to her at this stage of the game. > [@](#): > > You’re still not getting it. Garnishment proceedings cannot begin until there’s been a trial (or at least an opportunity for one) and a judgment. These are hardly details. The letter is a detail. Ignoring it has no particular legal significance. The letter in no way sets up (or is even a prerequisite for) a garnishment. By proceedings, I’m talking about the trial. YOU aren’t getting it. Where did I say that ignoring the letter gave the collectors a better chance to pursue collections through a judgement? My point was that if A. They cannot call you and B. You don’t respond to their letters then C. They may feel, if the debt warrants it, they should go forward to obtain a judgement for the purposes of garnishing the wages of the debtor. > [@](#): > > Wrong again. You are confusing two separate concepts. One is the length of time a debt may appear on a credit report. This is, indeed, 7 years. But it has nothing to do with how long a debtor may enforce a debt. That’s governed by different statutes of limitation, which vary by state, and also by type of debt. Limitations periods run from the date of default (sometimes a later event can reset the statute.) For example, in my state, the limitations period for most debts evidenced by a writing is 10 years. And once there’s a judgment, it can be enforced (with easily obtained renewals) for up to 20 years. I’m not a Texas attorney, but 4 years appears to be the relevant limitations period there, and judgments appear to be good for 10 years, not including renewals. Again, I can’t tell if you are deliberately misreading me, or if you just failed reading comprehension. I’m not talking about judgments, I’m talking about debts (that’s why I typed DEBTS). Plain old debts, not hot checks, not warrants, not a debt that the creditor considered important enough to obtain a judgement for. I don’t really understand why you are trying to nitpick every sentence I write, when it seems perfectly clear to everyone else what I mean. Now, perhaps my original statement was not completely clear, as I did not add “of getting a judgement” to my statement “go to all of that trouble”, but I really don’t think that your attitude in your subsequent post to me was warranted, and though I appreciate the fact that you have failed to make similar remarks in this post, I still feel that you are reading something into my posts that simply isn’t there. As I have been mostly posting to this thread while working, or while I should be doing homework or sleeping, I probably have been a little shorter with my explanations than I should be, but I think we are on the verge of seriously hijacking this thread for little to no reason. Since she is still planning to get proof of the debt before anything else happens (if that’s necessary, since they aren’t calling the co back) then we are jumping the gun significantly by discussing garnishments in any case. ---
**Author:** ![GaWd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/f08c70/32.png) [@GaWd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GaWd)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2004, 8:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fraudster-collection-agency-has-just-called-my-fiance/280088/40 "2004-12-17T08:10:26Z")
> [@Lynn Bodoni](#): > > The reason I copied the FTC on the letter was because the compnay in question had already been fined at least once by the [FTC](http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2004/03/camco.htm), and I wanted CAMCO to realize that I knew what they were up to…that is, they were trying to get us to pay off a debt that we had already paid. While I wouldn’t advise copying the FTC in every instance, in this case I felt that it was appropriate. I’m sure that it was proper for you to take those steps indicated. I really wanted to try and persuade people reading this thread that there’s not always a reason to copy the FTC/DCA/AG in most cases unless requested by them, like the poster suggested. Sam [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fraudster-collection-agency-has-just-called-my-fiance/280088.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fraudster-collection-agency-has-just-called-my-fiance/280088.md?page=3)