Why Compliance and Debt Verification is Successful
We require your collector to provide verification and proof of their legal authority to collect from you. Our compliance Department makes sure the collections abide by FDCPA laws. Clients are often surprised to learn that they do not; in fact, over 10,000 debt cases were dismissed in Maryland alone due to a debt collector not being licensed (not having legal authority) to collect.
The following is a clear example of why Compliance and Debt verification works:
According to a prominent state Civil Court Judge in Brooklyn, Judge Noach Dear stated, "I would say that roughly 90 percent of the credit card lawsuits are flawed and can't prove the person owes a debt[...]." Judge Dear said he "presides over as many as 100 such cases a day."
"The problem, according to judges, is that credit card companies are not always following the proper legal procedures, even when they have the right to collect money. Certain cases hinge on mass-produced documents because the lenders do not provide proof of the outstanding debts, like the original contract or payment history."
As they work through a glut of bad loans, companies like American Express, Citigroup and Discover Financial are going to court to recoup their money. But many of the lawsuits rely on erroneous documents, incomplete records and generic testimony from witnesses, according to judges who oversee the cases.
Here’s another example of why Debt Verification works:
State of California Department of Justice: Attorney General Kamala D. Harris Announces Suit Against JPMorgan Chase for Fraudulent and Unlawful Debt-Collection Practices
Thursday, May 9, 2013
LOS ANGELES – “Attorney General Kamala D. Harris today filed an enforcement action against JPMorgan Chase & Co. (Chase) alleging that the bank engaged in fraudulent and unlawful debt-collection practices against tens of thousands of Californians.
The suit alleges that Chase engaged in widespread, illegal robo-signing, among other unlawful practices, to commit debt-collection abuses against approximately 100,000 California credit card borrowers over at least a three-year period.”