That's probably why St. John's Music Store "lost" your account statements every time you called for them. They anticipated you would be ignorant of Manitoba Laws, being from Ontario. They were aware they might be subjecting themselves to wrongful penalty charges if it was found out they were over representing the amount owed.

Think about it for 2 seconds. How could they expect to take you to court if they don't have any account statements or records? They would have to present copies of them in support of a Statement of Claim if they hoped to obtain a judgment against you. Otherwise, a judge would dismiss their claim. No statements = No judgment.

In your particular case where the collection agency may be trying to collect between one and two thousand dollars in excess of what is legally owed, the compensation you are due might be significant. You mentioned you are awaiting Silverthorn's book. When you get it, you'll notice on Page 105, under the section "Seeking Compensation for Wrongful Collection," he brings up the same matter.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SEEKING COMPENSATION FOR WRONGFUL COLLECTION

"A Manitoba resident is only entitled to triple damages for wrongful collection where the consumer has actually paid monies to a collection agency that were not rightfully owing. In contrast, in the Yukon a consumer is entitled to treble damages for wrongful collection where the collection agency collects or attempts to collect monies that are not rightfully owed....

[cf] 66 Manitoba Consumer Protection Act, C.C.C.M c. C200, ss. 101(1), and the Yukon Consumers Protection
Act, R.S.Y. 2002, c. 40, ss. 74(1)."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

However, as I said before, Section 101(1) of the Manitoba Consumer Protection Act that Silverthorn quotes contains a (b) subsection where it stipulates that even an attempt at collection for any amount in excess of what is legally due qualifies for compensation eligiblity. You might want to phone Manitoba Consumer Protection on Monday to check out the obvious discrepancy. Hopefully, they are a sharper lot than our Ontario Ministry. They couldn't be much worse.

Good Luck.

Ray

What really surprised me was they wasted $8.50 to send me a Express post letter as I thought Collection agencies were cheap. I in turn have sent off a letter to the office of the MAnitoba Consumer Protection and will see what happens I also sent off forms to have the debt corrected on my credit report and I also sent a copy of the Manitoba Consumer Protection Act to the jerks lawyers and am waiting to see what happened to the letter I sent to St John Music Also it isnt American Idol it is the Amazing Race and Big Brother that I watch Thanks again and I am waiting for my copy of the book should be great reading

Ha, Ha, you gotta love collection lawyers. So creative. They really are big, bad wolves that prey on the weak and ill informed. Don't you think if they were going to sue you, they would have already gone ahead and done so? They know when they've got a fish on the hook and don't want to let it get away.

At this point it seems you have one or more of the following options

1. Be real nice to them and give them everything they want.
2. Tell the collection agencies of human misery to F*** Off and go get a real job.
3. Get real frightened and beg them for mercy and to leave you alone.
4. Tell them to bring it on and see you in court.
5. Pay lots of money to a lawyer like Mark Silverthorn to send them a letter to leave you alone.
6. Do absolutely nothing and continue watching American Idol reruns.
7. Now that you have in writing the specific sum they are demanding, you might send them a copy of the letter you are sending to the Manitoba Ministry of Consumer Protection demanding they pay you the statutory 300% differential penalty between what you actually owe and what they claim you owe. But before you do this, demand those accounting statements they are required by regulation to send you.

Personally, I would use a combo of options 2 and 4 (and even no. 6 as long as Paula Abdul wasn't on).

However that's me. But the reality is that you are indimidated and frightened. Predators, financial and otherwise, can sense that fear and they feed off of it. You seem incapable of defending yourself (due to your illness, possibly) and that's who wolves and collection lawyers always go after.

For yourself, maybe it wouldn't be a bad idea to pay Silverthorn to send them a "get lost or else" letter quoting the 50 rules of the Manitoba Consumer Protection Act they've broken. Hopefully, their Ministry of Consumer Protection isn't as pathetic as Ontario's is under Brian Pitkin - an opinion shared and expressed by disgusted ex collectors, themselves.

Option 7 is real interesting but would require you to have accurate accounting statements to present proof of what amount (if any) that you truly owe St. John's Music Store and Commercial Credit Adjusters.

Silverthorn, in his book, states that in Manitoba (unlike the Yukon), the debt must already have been paid for there to be recovery eligiblity of the 300% penalty. He quotes the same section 101(1) of the Manitoba Consumer Protection Act that I sent you 2 weeks ago. However, Section 101(1) has a part (b) which says that the amount owed only has to be falsely claimed by the creditor and not necessarily paid. I should have phoned their Ministry to verify to see if this practice is enforced. I'm not splitting hairs because, in your case, 300% could amount to $3K to $5K dollars.

Ray

Addendum

Manitoba Consumer Protection Act:

Penalty for wrongful collection:

Section 101(1) Where a collection agent, or a creditor, or any other person, charges a debtor with any amount that is not rightfully collectable from the debtor by reason of any provision of section 98, the debtor may

(a) if the amount has been paid by the debtor, recover from the creditor an amount equal to three times the amount of the charge as a debt due to the debtor; or

(b) if the amount has NOT been paid OR partly paid, set-off an amount equal to three times the amount of the charges against the amount rightfully owing to the creditor and, if the amount of the set-off is greater than the amount rightfully owing, recover the excess from the creditor as a debt due to the debtor.

Letter came today it was express post to me I had to sign for it from the lawyers who sent me the letter before telling me that they are starting court action on me I called the Manitoba small claims office spoke to my nice lady clerk and she cant find any record of a court judgement or even paperwork on any thing to do with a case on me so now I am confused....

Nah, they can't read; they're collection agents.

Ray

Actually I did that when you first posted me the link I emailed it to the Music company themselves as they have a email address The reply I got back was I dont know waht I am talking about and you will be hearing from Collections which I of course did. I also have ordered the book and wonder if I should mention the book to the collection agency and tell them they should read it

Yes, you live in Ontario but the contract and collection agency are governed by Manitoba law.

As for the collection agency: Tell them to "Bring it On!" Maybe, you'll be one of Mark's "1 in 10,000." (But don't hold your breathe.)

For laughs, you could email them the link of what I told you and see what their response is, but it really would only be for laughs. Come to think of it, isn't that what clowns are for?

Ray

Since I live in Ontario and not a resident of Manitoba I dont think that applies to my case. However I sent another letter by registered mail to the collection company and I also got the address of the lawyer who wrote me to say that if I dont pay the collection company the full amount of money in 21 they will be suing me with no more notice. In the letter I stated that under the Manitoba Consumer Protection Act I am missing several pages of key information and I would like them ASAP as I am disputing the debt I also told them I want the collection agency to put on my credit report that I am disputing that bill I also plain tomorrow to call the Consumer affairs people and get there help on having this entry on my credit report marked with a reason why it is there and to add my dispute on this bill.

Re: Previous advice to Franniee2003 and Mark's book.

Last week, I advised a lady living in Ontario to file a 300% counterclaim against a collection agency from Manitoba that was bamboozling and threatening legal action over illegal and excessive fees. I just noticed in Mark Silverthorn's book, that he also mentions the same recourse that exploited debtors have; one which is unique to Manitoba and the Yukon.

However, a couple of caveats: On page 105 of his book, Silverthorn distinguishes that any excess money to be reimbursed to the debtor must already have been paid to the collection agency if it's in Manitoba, while in the Yukon, only efforts to collect it are required for reimbursement eligibility.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SEEKING COMPENSATION FOR WRONGFUL COLLECTION

" If you are a resident of Manitoba or the Yukon and a collection agency has collected monies from you that were not rightfully owed then you might be able to recover compensation from the collection agency equal to three times the amount wrongfully collected. This situation might arise in a number of scenarios: the collection agency collects money from the wrong person or the collection agency collects money from the
correct person but more monies than it is lawfully entitled to recover. The latter situation might arise where a collection agency has added certain fees to the balance owing over and above what the debtor owes to the creditor. A Manitoba resident is only entitled to triple damages for wrongful collection where the consumer has actually paid monies to a collection agency that were not rightfully owing. In contrast, in the Yukon a consumer is entitled to treble damages for wrongful collection where the collection agency collects or attempts to collect monies that are not rightfully owed."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In his footnote, Silverthorn quotes the same section of the Manitoba Consumer Protection Act that I gave Franniee; namely, Section 101(1)

But here is a reprint of what Section 101(1) says

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Section 101(1): Where a collection agent, or a creditor, or any other person, charges a debtor with any amount that is not rightfully collectable from the debtor by reason of any provision of section 98, the debtor may

(a) if the amount has been paid by the debtor, recover from the creditor an amount equal to three times the amount of the charge as a debt due to the debtor;

OR

(b) if the amount has not been paid or partly paid, set-off an amount equal to three times the amount of the charges against the amount rightfully owing to the creditor and, if the amount of the set-off is greater than the amount rightfully owing, recover the excess from the creditor as a debt due to the debtor.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

After reading Silverthorn, I thought perhaps I gave the lady incorrect advice, but the fact that there is a second (b) clause seems to indicate that people are entitled to it irrespective of whether the claimed amount has been paid. The drafting legislators must have realized that, in practice, trying to recover any money from a collection agency would be difficult enough, but trying to get 300% back from the pirates?? Good luck! (I wonder if Natale Law Offices tries to collect in Manitoba.)

Also I'm not too sure about Silverthorn's 3 criteria for laying criminal harassment charges on page 116 of his book

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

".....To successfully prosecute a collector for the offence of making harassing telephone calls, the Crown prosecutor will need to prove the following three elements of the offence:

1. the collector is making repeated phone calls;
2. the collector intends to harass another person; and
3. the calls are being made without lawful excuse.

A collector cannot be convicted under this section for making a single phone call,regardless of how unconscionable his behavior is. The collector must make two or more phone calls......."

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I've discussed Section CCC [Criminal Code of Canada] 372(3) in previous posts as it applies to collection agents. My first comment was that it was not the general intent of this section to get itself involved with the tens of thousands of daily squabbles that creditors and their collection agencies get into with guys who miss their payments. If it was, the courts would be clogged with a million cases a year on this issue alone. Justice would grind to a halt if all such nuisance complaints were admitted.

And so the issue would have to be really onerous for cops to get involved as they've told me. I saw one case where a collection agency threatened to break a guys legs. (Possibly, a drunken iQor, Inc formerly CBCL - Canadian Bonded Credit Limited - Now Iqor Collection Agency agent using callblock - those guys are such kidders - and creative too) Maybe with stuff like that.

However, as to Mark's point about the necessity of the calls having to be repeated. Generally, yes. Nonetheless there may be exceptions. It's been a while, but the last time I looked in Martin's Criminal Code Case Law Guide, I believe they mentioned a precedent setting case where a fellow was convicted on the basis of a single phone call and clearly stipulated harassment by phone doesn't necessarily have to consist of multiple calls. If you threaten to break a persons legs, using the all seven swear words, once is enough.

As well, with respect to point 3: generally, the fact that a collection agency is trying to recover a lawful debt is enough to constitute "a lawful cause." The fact that the collector is calling you on Sunday or is not licensed for the province they're calling you in, seems to be a very doubtful or sufficient reason to categorize it as an "unlawful cause."

Probably, the courts would interpret such things as administrative breaches. Nonetheless, if the collector calls you 12 times on Christmas Day, that's stepping over the line.

After all, if this stuff is true, ask Silverthorn how many collection agents, in all his years of experience, have ever been charged, much less convicted of criminal harassment. Obviously, such laws are designed for loan sharks, Hells Angels' lackeys and other assorted bums and gangs, violent domestic disputes and stalking.

Ray

franniee...
call consumer protection... government of manitoba..
Ultimately you need to contact the people that enforce the laws on credit repair