Fighting betweens yourselves is unproductive, confusing to viewers and is exactly what collection agencies want.

You're all on the same team--play together, play nice.

Fighting betweens yourselves is unproductive, confusing to viewers and is exactly what collection agencies want.

You're all on the same team--play together, play nice.

"Your fifth para gives an example of someone writing 20 letters to an MPP and the collection agency quoting 21 different pieces of legislation to "cease and desist, " and the fact that the creditor is simply going to circulate the same debt to 8 or 9 other collectos[sic.], is again as insulting."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You listed about 20 points of dispute besides the one above. It's Saturday and I have to go and work out. Besides, when someone develops a monomania about a certain idea or belief or whatever, it's unproductive or even counterproductive to get into an argument with them. They see what they want to see.

Everything I say is for designed for the practical betterment of the questioner. I know I've gotten a lot of people annoyed from time to time due to my criticism of the advice given by those who were not in financial trouble themselves, but were giving unhelpful advice to people writing in who were in a jam.

Some of their motives may have been to take advantage of debtors in distress; however, as in your case, some were genuinely trying to help them with no dishonorable ulterior motives. Still, I felt it my responsiblity, in either case, to to be frank when required whenever the advice was a waste of the debtor's time or just plain incorrect.

Because the forum is the expression of one's opinion, you are free to disagree with me and, conversely, I am free to disagree with you. People can listen to and try whatever advice suits them. Invariably, there's been a steady stream of noses out of joint whenever I have negatively critiqued what others have said but my philosophy is: "principle before personality" - it's the value or truth of the information given that counts; not the personality who delivered it. And so I'm sorry if your nose is out of joint (to borrow one of Dostoyevsky's favorite expressions); nontheless, before I say anything, I do make a an effort to put some thought behind it.

For example, let's look at your above excoriation of me - I don't have time to get into all of them.

The "20 letters quoting 21 pieces of legislation" is simply a literary device of putative and facetious hyperbole to get a point across more effectively. That is why we use figures of speech in the English language. If I say that someone is "braindead", I don't actually mean the person is dead, only that they are insuperably uncomprehending. Get it? Oh, never mind.

With respect to the second part of the criticism: yes, the creditor, for 8000 bucks, - if they don't sue Tara or sell the account - will very likely rotate the account to at least a half a dozen additional collection agencies (or maybe 8 or 9 if it's the TD Bank) until they succeed. And so, if Tara insists on going the letter writing route, she may indeed have to write a a lot more than 20 letters, so she should stock up on her supply of stamps.

Finally, I don't know why you call the paragraph insulting, although it may be inaccurate since Tara since might have to write 50 or 60 letters.

Anyhow, a similar ditto for each other point.

I gotta go and work out.

Ray

"Your fifth para gives an example of someone writing 20 letters to an MPP and the collection agency quoting 21 different pieces of legislation to "cease and desist, " and the fact that the creditor is simply going to circulate the same debt to 8 or 9 other collectos, is again as insulting."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You listed about 20 points of dispute besides the one above. It's Saturday and I have to go and work out. Besides, when someone develops a monomania about a certain idea or belief or whatever, it's unproductive or even counterproductive to get into an argument with them. They see what they want to see.

Everything I say is for designed for the practical betterment of the questioner. I know I've gotten a lot of people annoyed from time to time due to my criticism of the advice given by those who were not in financial trouble themselves, but were giving unhelpful advice to people writing who were in a jam.

Some of their motives may have been to take advantage of debtors in distress; however, as in your case some were genuinely trying to help them with no dishonorable ulterior motives. Still, I felt it my responsiblity, in either case, to to be frank when required whenever the advice was a waste of the debtor's time or just plain incorrect.

Because the forum is the expression of one's opinion, you are free to disagree with me and, conversely, I am free to disagree with you. People can listen to and try whatever advice suits them. Invariably, there's been a steady stream of noses out of joint whenever I have negatively critiqued what others have said but my philosophy is: "principle before personality" - it's the value or truth of the information given that counts; not the personality who delivered it. And so I'm sorry if your nose is out of joint (to borrow one of Dostoyevsky's favorite expressions); nontheless, before I say anything, I do make a an effort to put some thought behind it.

For example, let's look at the your above excoriation of me - I don't have time to get into all of them.

The "20 letters quoting 21 pieces of legislation" is simply a literary device of putative and facetious hyperbole to get a point across more effectively. That is why we use figures of speech in the English language. If I say that someone is "braindead", I don't actually mean the person is dead, only that they are insuperably uncomprehending. Get it? Oh, never mind.

With respect to the second part of the criticism: yes, the creditor, for 8000 bucks, - if they don't sue Tara or sell the account - will very likely rotate the account to at least a half a dozen additional collection agencies (or maybe 8 or 9 if it's the TD Bank) until they succeed. And so, if Tara insists on going the letter writing route, she may indeed have to write a a lot more than 20 letters, so she should stock up on her supply of stamps.

Finally, I don't know why you call the paragraph insulting, although it may be inaccurate since Tara since might have to write 50 or 60 letters.

Anyhow, a similar ditto for each other point. I gotta go and work out.

Ray

If you go to the "ABOUT" page link from the home page of this site, you will find a listing of "Discussion Categories."

There are 15 seperate listings. Of those, "Collection Agencies" is the most visited with, if the figures are accurate, 1671 hits. The next closest, "Debt Settlement," with 391 hits, enjoys 1/4 the popularity of the "Collection Agencies."

There are 4 collector hits to every settlement hit.

That should tell the viewer something.

From the hundreds of posts I have read recently..I cannot remember more than a brief posative comment or two about collectors and their agencies.

In short the posters' are fed up with the antics of these people.

And they write looking for help. The type of help that both you and I Raymond can, and have been providing. Others as well of course.

Rather than attacking my fellow participants, you will please note that my posts have dealt with the problems and questions posed, and detailed answers and plenty of quotes from the appropriate provincial legislation has accompanied these posts.

Your latest post, under several letters of the alphabet, brings forth considerable detail about the uphill battle that accompanies any attempts to hold collection agencies and their collectors accountable. However your dismal outlook of the likelyhood of success further aggravates the problem, by not taking steps to try and reduce the abuse so prevalent in the industry.

Collectors often get away with this abuse because the debtor is unaware of his or her rights, lacks the capacity to articulate..or prove the complaint or lacks the tenacity to carry it forth with such force as to command attention from those tasked with dealing with the issue.

However, recent cases have clearly shown that the collector can be knocked from his pearch, and as often, the debtor can be well rewarded for taking on the challenge.

As an advocate with a long list of credentials, I am insulted by not only your approach, but your eagerness to downplay the results that debtors can achieve by standing up to this abuse.

I have no interest in getting into a pissing contest with you Raymond, but any advocate worth their salt would not stand by and allow some of your comments to remain on the record unchallenged.

Let's start with your post's para one in which you make a reference to "bad debts," when clearly, many a post of this site says that there is no debt at all..that it was paid off..or their was a mistaken identity etc.

You continue in that para with the fear that a debtor must fear from facing his or her creditor or collectors in court.

It seems that the records have clearly shown on this site and others that the opposite ought to be more the truth.

It is the fear that the creditor and collector ought to have about their performance..outside of ther law, that the courts with be unimpressed with, and quite willing to provide appropriate sanctions for.

Your third para flippant comment about... "almost everyone else on the forum," trying to avoid theirn debts," of course is silly when many of these same debts are, in the words of the posters' NOT VALID DEBTS.

Nor is it appropriate to say that by wanting to hold the abuser accountable, the debtor is mearly trying to avoid his debts.

That's the garbage all debtors hear from the mouth of the collector. One would think it would not come from the mouth of one who professing a desire to help the debtor on this site.

Your comments about writing..."a gazillion letters asking for everything from collection agencies licenses to dog permits are living in never, never land," is nothing short of insulting to debtors.

The law provides for the collector to provide..and the debtor to ask for a license to prove the collector is indeed authorized to attempt at collection. Seeking evidence of same is not in "Never Never land, but in the real world.

I do not recall seeing any posts hear for anyone enquiring about dog permits, but I do recall you attacking a poster with referrences to several animals.

Rather unproductive I would suggest.

Your fourth para acknowleging several posters who spend a lot of time writing letters... seemingly because its all they know," again seems to be nothing more than an attack on those who choose to do something about this harrassment.

Should we not be encouraging them to take on these very tasks instead of just giving up. (This is of course not to say that the debt issue itself is to be ignored.)

Your fifth para gives an example of someone writing 20 letters to an MPP and the collection agency quoting 21 different pieces of legislation to "cease and desist, " and the fact that the creditor is simply going to circulate the same debt to 8 or 9 other collectos, is again as insulting.

Let me tell you Raymond, every one of those letters is evidence for a court room. And every one of those 8 or 9 agencies will probably commit the very same offences. And 8 or 9 times ten or 20 violations makes for a wopping settlement in the favor of the debtor, no doubt in most cases far and above the original debt that would be set off in the courtroom.

You suggest this is a loser's play. I'll tell you sir, the loser would not be the debtor but the creditor who hired all those abusing colectors and the collectors and their agencies.

Read some case law Raymond.

There is no need for a debtor, who goes to court to have his or her debt matter dealt with, to feel embarrased. He or she can hold their head in pride because just about every other human being was in his or her spot at one time or another. But unlike most of the others this debtor is willing to face the tough odds and try to do somehting about the abuse he or she and family and friends and employer and on and on had to go through just because they were legally in debt.

I do agree with one of your ending comments though. You say that most people just want to complain and wallow in their grief.

Perhaps a little more motivation from you instead of ridicule might help them rise up to the challenge.

BA

If you go to the "ABOUT" page link from the home page of this site, you will find a listing of "Discussion Categories."

There are 15 seperate listings. Of those, "Collection Agencies" is the most visited with, if the figures are accurate, 1671 hits. The next closest, "Debt Settlement," with 391 hits, enjoys 1/4 the popularity of the "Collection Agencies."

There are 4 collector hits to every settlement hit.

That should tell the viewer something.

From the hundreds of posts I have read recently..I cannot remember more than a brief posative comment or two about collectors and their agencies.

In short the posters' are fed up with the antics of these people.

And they write looking for help. The type of help that both you and I Raymond can, and have been providing. Others as well of course.

Rather than attacking my fellow participants, you will please note that my posts have dealt with the problems and questions posed, and detailed answers and plenty of quotes from the appropriate provincial legislation has accompanied these posts.

Your latest post, under several letters of the alphabet, brings forth considerable detail about the uphill battle that accompanies any attempts to hold collection agencies and their collectors accountable. However your dismal outlook of the likelyhood of success further aggravates the problem, by not taking steps to try and reduce the abuse so prevalent in the industry.

Collectors often get away with this abuse because the debtor is unaware of his or her rights, lacks the capacity to articulate..or prove the complaint or lacks the tenacity to carry it forth with such force as to command attention from those tasked with dealing with the issue.

However, recent cases have clearly shown that the collector can be knocked from his pearch, and as often, the debtor can be well rewarded for taking on the challenge.

As an advocate with a long list of credentials, I am insulted by not only your approach, but your eagerness to downplay the results that debtors can achieve by standing up to this abuse.

I have no interest in getting into a pissing contest with you Raymond, but any advocate worth their salt would not stand by and allow some of your comments to remain on the record unchallenged.

Let's start with your post's para one in which you make a reference to "bad debts," when clearly, many a post of this site says that there is no debt at all..that it was paid off..or their was a mistaken identity etc.

You continue in that para with the fear that a debtor must fear from facing his or her creditor or collectors in court.

It seems that the records have clearly shown on this site and others that the opposite ought to be more the truth.

It is the fear that the creditor and collector ought to have about their performance..outside of ther law, that the courts with be unimpressed with, and quite willing to provide appropriate sanctions for.

Your third para flippant comment about... "almost everyone else on the forum," trying to avoid theirn debts," of course is silly when many of these same debts are, in the words of the posters' NOT VALID DEBTS.

Nor is it appropriate to say that by wanting to hold the abuser accountable, the debtor is mearly trying to avoid his debts.

That's the garbage all debtors hear from the mouth of the collector. One would think it would not come from the mouth of one who professing a desire to help the debtor on this site.

Your comments about writing..."a gazillion letters asking for everything from collection agencies licenses to dog permits are living in never, never land," is nothing short of insulting to debtors.

The law provides for the collector to provide..and the debtor to ask for a license to prove the collector is indeed authorized to attempt at collection. Seeking evidence of same is not in "Never Never land, but in the real world.

I do not recall seeing any posts hear for anyone enquiring about dog permits, but I do recall you attacking a poster with referrences to several animals.

Rather unproductive I would suggest.

Your fourth para acknowleging several posters who spend a lot of time writing letters... seemingly because its all they know," again seems to be nothing more than an attack on those who choose to do something about this harrassment.

Should we not be encouraging them to take on these very tasks instead of just giving up. (This is of course not to say that the debt issue itself is to be ignored.)

Your fifth para gives an example of someone writing 20 letters to an MPP and the collection agency quoting 21 different pieces of legislation to "cease and desist, " and the fact that the creditor is simply going to circulate the same debt to 8 or 9 other collectos, is again as insulting.

Let me tell you Raymond, every one of those letters is evidence for a court room. And every one of those 8 or 9 agencies will probably commit the very same offences. And 8 or 9 times ten or 20 violations makes for a wopping settlement in the favor of the debtor, no doubt in most cases far and above the original debt that would be set off in the courtroom.

You suggest this is a loser's play. I'll tell you sir, the loser would not be the debtor but the creditor who hired all those abusing colectors and the collectors and their agencies.

Read some case law Raymond.

There is no need for a debtor, who goes to court to have his or her debt matter dealt with, to feel embarrased. He or she can hold their head in pride because just about every other human being was in his or her spot at one time or another. But unlike most of the others this debtor is willing to face the tough odds and try to do somehting about the abuse he or she and family and friends and employer and on and on had to go through just because they were legally in debt.

I do agree with one of your ending comments though. You say that most people just want to complain and wallow in their grief.

Perhaps a little more motivation from you instead of ridicule might help them rise up to the challenge.

BA

1. You didn't answer the third and surely the most important question. Would you be willing to get your name published in the the Globe and Mail or on the CBC, like Carole Roach [vs TCR] for $4400?

2. It's rare, if ever, that a CCC Section 372(3) [telephone harassment] charge gets laid against a debtor squabbling with a collection agency.

The cops know what collection agencies are like and are very reluctant to do anything when collectors start whining that they are on the receiving end of their own medicine.

Still, as I've described in previous posts, hammering the hammerheads back and pushing the envelope of the law is still as much of an art as a science - no hard and fast rules can be made except for the following one: If you're not hammering them back to the point where they are they are starting to lose it and threatening you with harassment, you DEFINITELY haven't pushed the envelope hard enough.

3. Where did you get the info that collectors had to know they're being recorded for it to be admissible as courtroom evidence? If everyone had to be told they were being recorded, it would render the whole evidence gathering process useless.

Ray

Tape recordings are awesome proof... and admissable in a court of law so long as one party to the converstion (you) knows the conversation is being recorded.

Legal battles can be long and drawn out but, especially when done through small claims court, really aren't that complex.... at least... not in my experience.

I agree, though, the governments are useless. They're not even a good threat... I've tried that route in the past with the morons screwing with my credit rating.

What is it with you people? "Advocate" talks about different "philosophies." My philosophy is to help people do something to resolve, to whatever extent possible, their debt situation. Having collection agents call is annoying but 99.9% percent of the potential harm comes from what damage has been done to one's credit standing by the bad debt and what a creditor can or will do to you in court.

Everyone wants to live in peace as chronic fear and anger (which are the 2 emotions collectors use to manipulate you) are very corrosive emotionally. That's why collection agencies use them against you along with lying through their teeth to threaten you.

Having a collection agent call can be a barrel of laughs, but being taken to court and having your home, car or bank account seized, your wages garnished isn't. And so those of you - which seems to be almost everyone else on the forum - who think you can remove or escape the consquences of a legally valid bad debt by making a career of writing a gazillion letters asking for everything from collection agencies' licenses to dog permits are living in never, never land.

I know a lot of the regular posters to the forum spend countless hours on this tac, seemingly, because it's all they know - or ever will. But this only distracts from a debtor's main problem. How do they live with a (usually legally valid) debt hanging over their heads which they can't pay?

Another lady recently sent me a private email asking how she could get collectors off her back that were calling her at her job. I told her about some of the related laws; however, since she owes about $10K, even if that agency stops calling her because she writes 20 letters to her MPP and the collection agency quoting 21 different pieces of legislation to "cease and desist", the creditor is still going to rotate the account to another 8 or 9 collection agencies down the road to take their place. Didn't anyone see "Pearl Harbour"?

What's really needed is a plan to deal with the debt by facing: man to man (well, actually, man to bird), the collection agencies so that you can live in peace. Isn't that what it's all about?

For those of you contemplating suing a collection agency over harassment (like Angella suggested), you still need to ask yourself the following questions: 1. Do I have sufficient evidence to succeed? 2. Am I willing to go through the long and tiring legal process involved? 3. Am I willing to have my name displayed in the media with all the accompanying embarrassment that would inevitabley be created? If the answer to all 3 questions is yes, then go ahead. If not, don't waste your time.

But before you answer "yes" to all these questions, think about Deanna Natale. All the moaning, groaning and exhortation about fighting Deanna Natale on this forum and others didn't generate a single complaint about her to the Law Society of Upper Canada. In one respect, Natale's friends/colleagues "Complainer Hater/Willy Wallow/Jen(nifer)" were right: most people love to wallow about complaining without the slightest motivation to do anything about their problem.

And so I think what "Advocate" is advocating is a kind of philosophical choice. Do you want to play the role of a powerless victim/basket case and spend your time writing endless letters (and calling that "empowerment") - asking the government to do for you what you can and should do for yourself - OR, do you want to handle your debt by getting the best deal for yourself given your circumstances?

Choose.

Ray

Actually... for what it's worth... I think Ray's advice about allowing them to phone you is good... not only for the reason he outlined, but because if you get a phone recording device to record harassing phone calls, should they continue to attempt to call and harass you, you can take them to court and make THEM pay your credit card debt... :D