Here are the most common FDCPA violations that you should be aware of:

•  Debt collectors calling you repeatedly
• Debt collectors contacting your work, friends, family – anyone other than YOU
• Debt collectors contacting you even after you’ve requested them to stop via a “cease communication letter” or via the “automatic stay” injunction when you have filed for bankruptcy
• Making threats of legal action, ruining your credit score, or even humiliation
• Debt collectors verbally abusing you, insulting you and/or using vulgar language at you

These are just a few examples of violations of the FDCPA. Has something like this happened to you? Do you feel you’re become a victim of unfair debt collection practices? Do you want to learn more? Please contact The Manning Law Office for a free evaluation. Our FDCPA Attorneys in Orange County can help stop harassing debt collectors and help you see if you’re entitled to monetary damages. Call us to schedule your free consultation here in our Irvine office: 949-200-8755.

For example, under both statutes, debt collectors are prohibited from threatening to have you arrested or with very narrow exceptions, contact third parties regarding your debt.

However, there are some crucial distinctions between the FDCPA and RFDCPA.  One important difference is that the RFDCPA does not only regulate third-party debt collectors (i.e. those who purchase defaulted debt from an original creditor) but extends its protection to original creditors (i.e. American Express, Discover).  By contrast, the FDCPA applies only to third-party debt collectors.  In addition, while the FDCPA applies to attorneys, the RFDCPA does not.  Thus, claims against an abusive collection attorney must be brought under the FDCPA.   

Are you a victim of debt collection abuse? Do you want to learn more about debt collection laws in California and see whether you are entitled to monetary damages? Contact our Orange County debt collection abuse attorneys today to find out more.

A debt collector is allowed to contact you by telephone but ONLY at reasonable times. If a debt collector does contact you at a permissible time, the communication may still be unlawful. For example, a debt collector, by law, is not allowed to disclose to a third-party (including employers and family members, other than spouses) that you owe a debt. This type of conduct can be humiliating and very embarrassing for a person. Let the debt collector know that you will not tolerate such conduct by contacting us today to see if you or someone you know has a potential case.

It is important to remember that the FDCPA has a one year statute of limitation. Therefore, to preserve your rights under the FDCPA, you must file a lawsuit against the debt collector within one year from the date of the violation. Call our FDCPA Attorneys in Orange County today at: (949) 200-8755 to see if you have a case.

On February 13, 2012, the Federal Trade Commission filed a complaint and request for a temporary restraining order against Villa Park, California-based American Credit Crunchers, LLC, an affiliated company called Ebreeze, LLC, and the companies’ owners, with violating the FTC Act and the FDCPA.

The FTC alleged that these companies obtained information, including Social Security or bank account numbers, from consumers who had inquired about, applied for, or obtained online payday loans. These companies were allegedly working with telephone callers in INDIA who allegedly called consumers using deceptive statements and threats to convince them to pay debts they did not owe.

Often pretending to be law enforcement or other government authorities, these callers would allegedly falsely threaten to immediately arrest and jail consumers who did not agree to make a payment on a delinquent loan. The callers would even claim they were filing a large lawsuit against the consumer because of the delinquent loan or that they would have the consumer fired from his or her job. But, the consumers did not owe money to these companies!

In the case of one victim, a caller with an Indian accent reached his wife at home and told her the victim would be arrested and immediately imprisoned if he did not pay his payday loan debt. The caller said he knew where the victim worked, and threatened to send police to arrest him. Fearing possible arrest, the victim paid the caller $532.87, even though he was not delinquent on any loan.

As a result, on February 21, 2012, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois Eastern Division ordered a stop to the illegal conduct and has frozen the operation’s assets.

If you are being threatened by abusive debt collection practices, the experienced attorneys Orange County debt collection abuse attorneys at The Manning Law Office will help you! The collections abuse victim in this FDCPA case should receive monetary damages and payment of attorneys’ fees and costs, once the evidence is marshaled. Call our law office (949) 200-8755 today, to sue the collector that is harassing you! The statute of limitations on this type of case is only one year so you must call now or else you cannot file.

So your bankruptcy petition was granted and your debts were discharged months ago, but that pesky creditor keeps calling. Did your lawyer mess up and forget to include them? Mostly likely the answer to that question is, No, your lawyer didn’t screw up. It is very possible that even after a bankruptcy has been discharged, creditors will still attempt to harass you to collect on that debt.

Is it legal? No. Sometimes, let’s face it, more times than not, creditors ignore the proper procedures to collect on a debt. Some even seem to think that a United States Bankruptcy Court’s issuance of a discharge is not relevant. If you are being harassed over a debt that was discharged in a bankruptcy proceeding, don’t panic, contact our office today. We can determine if the harassment is improper and if the debt was truly discharged in a bankruptcy.

The main caveat to this entire situation is that the creditor was given notice of the bankruptcy proceedings and discharge. Bankruptcies operate as a federal injunction against the collection of any and all debts that the debtor owed prior to the bankruptcy case being filed. So as long as the debtor was given notice of the proceeding, any attempt to collect a discharged debt is a violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) was established by Congress to “eliminate abusive debt collection practices by debt collectors, to ensure that those debt collectors who refrain from using abusive debt collection practices are not competitively disadvantaged, and to promote consistent State action to protect consumers against debt collection abuses.” So you may be wondering what counts as an abusive practice? Is the collection of discharged debts abusive?

• If you filed bankruptcy using an attorney, then the attorney represents you with respect to all of your debts. Therefore, a debt collector should never contact you to collect on any of the debts that were a part of the bankruptcy. Debt collectors are forbidden from communicating with the debtor when the collector knows for certain that they are represented by an attorney.
• If you filed bankruptcy, and were granted a discharge and the debt collectors informs you there are consequences if you don’t pay the debt, such as taking legal action, the debt collectors are in violation of the FDCPA because they are threatening legal action in which they cannot legally take.

• Also, if you have filed bankruptcy and been granted a discharge, the debt is legally unenforceable. It is as if the debt no longer exists. Therefore, when a debt collector attempts to collect on this debt by sending you a letter, or contacting you by phone, they are violating the FDCPA because they are misrepresenting the character, nature and legal status of the debt.

These are just a few ways that debt collectors are violating the FDCPA when they attempt to collect on a debt that has been discharged in a bankruptcy proceeding. Additionally, the debt collectors have violated the California fair debt collection procedures as well. Consumers are entitled to recover statutory damages of up to $1,000.00 for violating the FDCPA, plus actual damages caused by the violation. If you prevail in your lawsuit against the creditor, they can even be ordered to pay your attorney’s fees.

So, did your bankruptcy attorney screw up? Most likely, no. Did the bankruptcy court forget to include a creditor? Most likely, no. Are you the victim of abusive debt collection procedures? Most likely, YES! Former debtors should always remember, once you have filed your bankruptcy case, that is your bankruptcy case forever. It will always safeguard you against the collection of these uncollectable debts.

If you have been a victim of this type of creditor collection abuse don’t wait, contact our our office today!

In September of 2006, the collections abuse victim filed suit against GENERAL REVENUE CORPORATION for their alleged violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”). The victim incurred a financial obligation dated back to 1993, which eventually went into default for late payment: a guaranteed student loan in the approximate amount of $4,600, used by the victim to attend college.  When the alleged debt was transferred to GENERAL REVENUE for collection of that debt, the victim started receiving collection calls. The collections abuse victim contended that GENERAL REVENUE violated the FDCPA based on the following facts:

(i)                  On or about May 23, 2006, a representative from GENERAL REVENUE called the victim at work, stating she was calling from GENERAL REVENUE, and wanting to set up payment arrangements for the victim’s defaulted student loans;

(ii)                The victim told the representative that he did not want to receive phone calls at work regarding this matter, and he would return the phone call after work;

(iii)               Later that same night, the victim called GENERAL REVENUE, spoke with the same representative, and discussed entering into a rehabilitation payment program;

(iv)              The rehabilitation repayment plan was to be twelve (12) equal monthly payments, reasonable and affordable to the victim;

(v)                The representative told the victim that her company required her to obtain his checking account number and bank routing information to make automatic EFT withdrawals from the victim’s personal accounts in order to set up the rehabilitation repayment plan;

(vi)              The Family Federal Educational Loan Program (FFEL) does NOT require that debtors provide post-dated EFT checks for establishing a rehabilitation repayment plan, nor does the FFEL require the debtor to provide private banking information to a third-party student loan collector in order to enter such a plan;

(vii)             At no time did the GENERAL REVENUE representative ever discuss the victim’s personal expenses, or economic circumstances, in attempting to determine a reasonable and affordable monthly payment amount to rehabilitate the student loan;

(viii)           After the victim refused to give his private bank information, the representative made several requests for more information, and then became very verbally abusive and disrespectful to the victim;

(ix)              The victim asked to speak to the representative’s supervisor, and was transferred to a male debt collector who stated he was the supervisor;

(x)                The victim asked the supervisor for written documentation before making any payment arrangements with GENERAL REVENUE; the supervisor agreed; and transferred the victim back to the original representative to make arrangements for the faxed information;

(xi)              The representative refused to fax documents without first obtaining the victim’s bank information; and

(xii)             The representative said that since the victim refused to set up payment arrangements, the collection would be sent to the wage garnishment department.

Sometime on or about June 9, 2006, the victim claimed to have received an application package from GENERAL REVENUE to rehabilitate his student loans:

(i)                 The cover letter accompanying the package instructed the victim to send in the completed forms package along with a good faith payment of $677.54 in order to start the repayment plan;

(ii)               The good faith payment amounted to 15% of the balance of the student loan, constituting an illegal demand for a minimum payment as a requirement to enter into a student loan rehabilitation plan, because it was an arbitrary minimum payment which did not take into account income, expenses, and economic circumstances; and

(iii)             A demand that the victim authorize GENERAL REVENUE to take post-dated electronic funds from his personal checking account in order to enter into a repayment plan.

On or about July 6, 2006, another representative from GENERAL REVENUE called the victim in an attempt to collect the debt, AFTER the victim had sent a certified “cease and desist” letter to GENERAL REVENUE demanding no further contact with the victim, which was SIGNED by a GENERAL REVENUE employee.

If you have incurred any debt, including debt from student loans, and you are the victim of illegal debt collection behavior, the experienced fdcpa attorneys at The Manning Law Office will defend you! The collections abuse victim in this FDCPA case should receive monetary damages and payment of attorneys’ fees and costs, once the evidence is marshaled.

You can feel assured that our foreclosure lawyers can help you through your most difficult times.

Our lender litigation attorneys at the Manning Law Office have been successful in stopping the foreclosure sales through litigating and obtaining court orders against these banks:

Wells Fargo, Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, GMAC, CitiMortgage,  Wachovia Home Mortgage, IndyMac, US Bank, First Federal Bank of CA, America’s Servicing Company, Aurora Loan Services, Cenlar, Flagstar Bank, OneWest, PHH Mortgage, Litton Loan Servicing, Suntrust Mortgage, Capital One Mortgage, Saxon Mortgage, National City, OCWEN Federal Bank

If you are ready to stop foreclosure on your home, contact our office today. Learn if you qualify to reduce your mortgage payments through a loan modification from an experienced foreclosure attorney.

Feel confident that your case will be handled by knowledgeable and expert lender litigation attorneys who will fight for your rights.  Read more about our services can help you save your home – view our client testimonials.

Manning Law Office Announces Investigation of Seventh Avenue Online Catalog for Unfair Debt Collection practices

The Manning Law Office has initiated an investigation of the Seventh Avenue Online Catalog and its family of catalog brands for alleged abusive debt collection practices directed against its clients when they fall behind on payments to the Seventh Avenue Online Catalog and its family of catalog brands, in some cases after only a few days delinquency.

The Seventh Avenue Online Catalog and its family of catalog brands include: Ginny’s (housewares), GrandPointe (fine apparel and furnishings), Midnight Velvet (sophisticated apparel and accessories), Monroe and Main (career and casual apparel), RaceTeamGear.com (licensed NASCAR gear), The Swiss Colony (specialty food items and gifts), The Tender Filet (premium meats and seafood), and Through the Country Door (casual furniture, furnishings and gifts).

The Seventh Avenue Online Catalog and its family of catalog brands make credit available to purchasers and allegedly engage in abusive collections practices when clients become late on their payments to Seventh Avenue Online Catalog, in some cases after only a few days delinquency. The reports of abusive collections tactics include making collections calls at all hours including to cellular phones in the middle of the night. As alleged, these practices are illegal under California’s Rosenthal Act (California’s version of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act “FDCPA” 15 U.S.C.§ 1692 et seq., , also known as the “RFDCPA” California Civil Code §§ 1788 et seq.) which bars unfair debt collection practices by original creditors. The Seventh Avenue Online Catalog and its family of catalog brands is also under investigation by the Manning Law Office for violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for the alleged improper use of automated dialing equipment and for allegedly making unauthorized calls to clients’ cellular phones.

The Manning Law Office would like to hear from customers of the Seventh Avenue Online Catalog and its family of catalog brands. Inquiries will be kept confidential. Information provided will be used to protect consumers against abusive debt collection practices.

Victims of collections abuse allegedly committed by the Seventh Avenue Online Catalog and its family of catalog brands may entitle victims to recover damages and to have their attorneys fees paid by the Seventh Avenue Online Catalog and its family of catalog brands.

Call the Manning Law Office at (949) 361-3232 to speak to a representative or email Joe@ManningLawOffice.com, reference the Seventh Avenue investigation.

The Manning Law Office is a National Consumer Protection Law Firm based in Orange County, California.

The Manning Law Office is a leader in consumer protection litigation including foreclosure defense litigation, loan modification litigation, HAMP plan litigation, abusive debt collection litigation, bankruptcy stay violation litigation, and personal injury litigation. The experienced litigators at the Manning Law Office also aid consumers with IRS Tax Settlement, Social Security Disability Application and Appeals. Contact us and tell us how we can help you. If you are a consumer in distress, contact us and tell us how we can help you.

But what is the difference between a loan modification through HAMP and a traditional loan modification? The HAMP (Home Affordable Modification Program) is a President Obama’s program that allows troubled homeowners (like those facing foreclosure) relief. It allows homeowners to reduce their monthly mortgage payments to 31% of their pre-taxed income by means of a loan modification. There are strict guidelines for this program and not everyone is eligible. For example, your loan must have originated after January 1, 2009 and the principal balance on the mortgage is $729,750 or less for one dwelling. Currently, the deadline for HAMP is until December 2012.

A traditional loan modification differs from HAMP in that some banks have created their own guidelines for modification eligibility. Typically, it includes these criteria:

1) You are unable to afford your mortgage

2) The loan modification you are requesting is for your primary residence

3) You have some type of hardship (which explains why you cannot afford your mortgage payments)

4) Your income is verifiable

If you have are not eligible for a HAMP loan modification and want to take the next step with a traditional loan modification, contact our Orange County loan modification attorneys – we can help ensure you’re taking the correct steps to help save your home from foreclosure.