I came across some information and was wondering if anyone has tried to sue the employee(s) of a debt collection agency, as well as. or in addition to, the agency itself?

Employee liability. "Since the employees of a debt collection agency are "debt collectors," they are liable for violations to the same extent as the agency."

http://fair-debt-collection.com/federal/Fair_Debt_Collection_Act/Section-13.html


Please response with you input. Thanks in advance.

Post Extras:

I don't have any experience with this, but was thinking it would be hard to do as debt collectors don't seem to use their real names. I guess you could sue them as John or Jane Doe and then find out who they were in discovery.


L

Post Extras:

problem is, how do you collect from a minimum wage worker?

Post Extras:

You may never collect, but as far as I'm concerned, it would make them think twice before violating someone's rights.

Post Extras:

YES you can sue the employee, the company, AND the manager/supervisor.

I sued a collection agency in TX, and was awarded a jugement against the agency, manager, and the employee that continued to call me :)

I live in CA, so I just had an attorney in TX register the jugements there....and Im just waiting for the checks to come in the mail.

In addition to the $, I placed the "abstract of judgment" on the credit reports of the manager and employee :)

james

Post Extras:

Good one!

Post Extras:

GREAT! That's bad news for Ms. Graves and Tom Wells with American Agencies.

Never would have thought of that.

And James, any chance to get you to post the abstract and give us some more info?

It would be SO encouraging to everybody out there struggling with collectors.

I better get to work on American Agencies right now. If I could only figure out what to do next.

Post Extras:

http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/fdcpa/fdcpact.htm

"The term does not include --

(A) any officer or employee of a creditor while, in the name of the creditor, collecting debts for such creditor; "

The FDCPA seems to be clearly stating that employees are NOT covered.

What gives?

Post Extras:

The information I noted was located at http://fair-debt-collection.com; regarding Section 813. Civil Liability.

In looking a the FDCPA, 813 states "any debt collector who fails to comply".

I guess the argument can be made that the Collection Agency and the "debt collector" could each be liable, if infact, the CA and the person handling the account are not the same person.

Just a few thoughts.

Post Extras:

I posted the DEFINITION of a debt collector as per the FDCPA.

You're going to argue that the FDCPA's definition is incorrect? Good luck with that!

"The information I noted was located at http://fair-debt-collection.com; regarding Section 813. Civil Liability."

Well, I certainly will never go that site again - knowing that their content is NOT what the law says. Who is this outfit anyway?

I was so excited about suing the employees, and it sure would be nice if James would clue us in on WHICH law he used to get that "alleged" judgment. :)

Post Extras:

Maybe it's because the FDCPA uses the word "CREDITOR" in their exclusion?

A debt collector works for a collector, not creditor. Isn't there SOME case involving employees?

Edited by Christine on 08/26/02 09:22 PM (server time).

Post Extras:

I don't have the answers here...but in some cases, I believe you can sue an employee...but I believe those to be under very narrow circumstances...not just in the sense that someone is trying to collect a debt and perhaps goes beyond what the law allows in trying to do so.

An example would be where a person works at a bank and pulls the credit report of her ex husband or neighbor just to see what's there, but outside her capacity of oh...say a loan officer. In this situation, the employee could be sued individually.

L

Post Extras:

I just edited my post above and then saw yours. I'd think there'd be cases with collectors employees being sued. I have TONS of names of supervisors.

Some collectors won't give their last name, but usually they have an extension or some ID, and when I can't get a last name, I ask for the supervisor. Just got off the phone with Chris Johnson, at RMA. I'm sure my client would like to sue him personally too!

Most "low level" collectors have bad credit, no money, and nothing but problems as it is, I don't think it's worth suing them. Had one ask about my services recently, she called to collect from one of my clients - inspite of his dispute. Talk about a conflict of interest. One client sues another client ... I politely told her to read my site.

Well, maybe I'll get my final settlement offer to Am. Ag. and simply tell them that I'll sue Tom Wells and Ms. Graves too - see if they respond.

Post Extras:

I apologize if I posted any mis-information. I will be the first to admit that I am new at this.

Lesson learned; I will be sure to research information found on other websites before posting.

I guess some things are too good to be true.

Post Extras:

It may not be misinformation! The FDCPA excludes the "creditor's" employee, but I didn't see anything about the collector's employees.

I try to always look for the law and case law to confirm MY interpretation of the law. Just got hit with the defendant's legal fees and I STILL think that I have a legal right to my adverse action letter. It says so in the FCRA.

I also just saw the STRANGEST 14 page "Defendants trial brief." A collector's response to a SMALL CLAIMS suit. Obviously written by a clueless attorney, wished I had the time to transcribe it.

Anyway, I'd really like to sue the collectors' employees, but I can't go to court and say that I read I can do that at a web site. I'd like to see some case law.

Post Extras:

United Creditors Alliance Corporation pays $146,000 in Civil Penalties to settle FTC charges.

http://www.ftc.gov/opa/1996/9609/uca.htm


Page 2

Further, the settlement would require UCA, for three years, to provide a notice to present and newly-hired employees telling them that they must comply with the FDCPA, in trying to collect money from consumers. The notice also informs the employees that, unless the consumer consents, a debt collector may not discuss the debt with any person other than the consumer and a few other persons, such as the consumer's attorney or spouse, AND THAT INDIVIDUAL DEBT COLLECTORS MAY BE FINANCIALLY LIABLE FOR THEIR VIOLATIONS OF THE ACT.

Please post reactions.

Post Extras:

Christine, what trouble are you having with American Agencies? They were trying to collect a very old phone bill from me, but I managed to get them off of my reports. I think I may also file against them for FDCPA violations, but I'm not sure it will be worth the trouble.

Post Extras:

It's all there:

http://forum.creditcourt.com/discus/messages/132/132.html

Post Extras:

This is fantastic! That's as good as it gets.

It's really nice to find some other people taking the time to search for this kind of documentation.

I'll repost that link and the entire page - it really can't get better than that.

This is totally off topic - but if anyone sees a similar document about the VENUE for FDCPA and FCRA cases being the debtor's county I'd greatly appreciate any links.

I know of several small claims cases that were dismissed for improper venue and need something to hand to the judges so they won't dismiss.

Post Extras:

Found some information on "Venue", not sure if it's interpretation or law. It is included in a 72 page document.

SUBJECT MATTER AND PERSONAL JURISDICTION

An FDCPA suit "may be brought in any appropriate United States district court without regard to the amount in controversy", within one year of the date of violation. 15 U.S.C. 1692k(d). State courts have concurrent jurisdiction. A jury trial is available in FDCPA actions brought in federal court.

Most courts have held that FDCPA litigation is appropriately filed within the district where the consumer received the communication. Officers and managers of the debt collector who have control over the procedures complained of may also be sued there.

Filing in the district where the letter was received has been upheld even where the debt collector's letter had been forwarded to a district in which it did not do business.

The debt collector normally may not bring counterclaims for either the underlying debt, or for bad faith and harassment.



Header: Fair Debt Collection Practices Act Update

Website: http://www.edcombs.com/CM/News/news7.asp

Post Extras:

This is by far the most comprehensive document on the FDCPA I've seen. Actually have a link to it at creditcourt, and I have yet to make it all the way through.

Thing is, it's not the law. However, at the top of the page it says:

"*This article is reproduced here without the supporting footnotes. For the entire article with the supporting materials, please contact Edelman, Combs & Latturner ."

Wonder if the footnotes would contain the actual case references. Mr. Edelman sent me his resume, they're lawyers looking for this type of biz. Not sure how much effort they want to put into helping people in small claims establish the venue - they don't get paid for that.

I've had my share of reality checks lately :)

And unfortunately they only take cases in IL, aside from nationwide class actions. A lot of great stuff at that site.

I'm pretty sure now that collectors, but not creditors employees can be sued, and I will name Tom Wells and Ms. Graves.

This morning I dreamed about settling with Am. Ag. after I filed in federal court, their attorney was a real nice guy! Too bad it was only a dream.

Post Extras:

I've come across a case that deals solely with "proper venue".

It's a little confusing, but very interesting.

Thompson v. The Electronic Transaction Corp.
1:98cv305-P

http://home.olemiss.edu


Let me know if it helps.

Post Extras:

Trixie, I've tried this URL a few times over the last week, but all I get is some web mail. ???

Post Extras:

Try typing in the case name with the case #


This is a memorandum Opinion regarding this case.

Northern District of Mississippi

I'm on AOL and can bring it up with just the case name.

Post Extras:

Try this;
www.msnd.uscourts.gov/opinions/2000/htm/00d0059p.htm

Post Extras:

Thanks! Is this the bottom line?

"A civil action wherein jurisdiction is not founded solely on diversity of citizenship may, except as otherwise provided by law, be brought only in (1) a judicial district where any defendant resides, if all defendants resident in the same State, (2) a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial part of property that is the subject of the action is situated, or (3) a judicial district in which any defendant may be found, if there is no district in which the action may otherwise be brought."

Read the whole thing, can't figure it out.

Post Extras: