Complaint

+1
Debra M. Persiano
Country: United States
I got a call today at home from a man stating he was a process server for Collin County DA's Office and he is with the Sheriff's office and needed to come serve a warrant on me.  I was shocked and asked why?  He stated do you live ....are you still at this address are you now at this address and I stated who are you?  He again, stated he was from the county going to serve court papers on me today. He gave me a toll free number for what he stated was the county's office which is 1 866.872.6116 gave me a case no. which he called a Cause No. 008307-TX. I called the number was transferred to a Mr. Fisher's office who stated that law suite in the amount of $6,214.24 was filed in Collin Co., Tx and that warrant was out for me.  He then after back and forth said let me get more information from my secretary and state this was for an outstanding debt in from Capital One a credit card that I obtained several years back and had disputes over interest charges etc.  He stated that if I did not want to go to court or jail that I could pay $1,951.00 in full by end of business today and this matter could be cleared up.  I explained that I recently lost my job etc.  Anyway, he stated that I needed to call him back by EOB today or they will serve the papers.  Ok, so that was a heads up for me.  I called the DA's office nothing is filed on me as of today, after searching PMG it is clear that they do not practice best practices for collections and have been in trouble for this before back in 2004.  I need someone to give me advise. I want to pay off my debt, I don't want this type of collections to continue this upset me, made my blood pressure raise, this type of collections are not the right thing to do.  Had they called and ask to make arrangements or give me an opportunity to clear the matter, rather then threaten me by taken legal action, or harassment stating they are sending a sheriff over today.  This is wrong, bad business, and should not continue this company is bad news.

Comments

  • 0
    Diana Mey
    | 3 replies
    A prelude to tonight's Nightline piece:

    W. Va. Woman Fights to Collect $10 Million from Debt Collectors

    http://abcnews.go.com/US/va-woman-fights-coll ... 97#.T5g46dXhfDJ
    • 0
      Thanks for the chutzpah replies to Diana Mey
      Ms. Mey You are my Hero!
    • 0
      tj replies to Diana Mey
      It will be interesting to see what spin ACA International tries to put on this.
    • 0
      bleh replies to Diana Mey
      nice news peice, didnot even try to expose anyone
  • 0
    chutzpah ???
    | 1 reply
    chutzpah ???
    • 0
      definition replies to chutzpah ???
      Chutzpah (pronounced huuts-pah) is a Yiddish word that is used by Jews and non-Jews alike to describe someone who is particularly audacious or has a lot of "guts." Chutzpah can be used in a variety of ways. You can say someone "had chutzpah" to do something, or you could describe them as a "chutzpanik" and achieve the same meaning. Chutzpah can be used to describe both males and females.
  • 0
    Go Diana
    Diana Mey was just on fox news this morning. She stated that her and her attorneys now have the names of the the scums from RFA that were harassing her. She said that they have names of owners and managers and an amendment has been filed to get her 10 million dollars. If those knuckleheads weren't worried before they better worry now. This is national news.
    Go GET THEM DIANA! WE ARE ALL SUPPORTING YOU.
  • 0
    where are they?
    | 2 replies
    Does anyone know the latest on Denise or Tina? Are they still in the business?
    • 0
      One hit wonder replies to where are they?
      | 1 reply
      Tune in to VH-1
      • 0
        american greed replies to One hit wonder
        Oh is the TV  show AMERICAN GREED on Vh1 now!
  • 0
    Lunds and Bagel
    | 2 replies
    Will they be able to buy themselves out of this?
    Do we expect that this will involve any criminal charges or is it all just about money?
    Will they back in operation soon or be banned forever like a previous posts stated?Is it even possible to be banned in The US of A from opening up a business?
    I obviously have a lot of questions and I am not sure anyone has the answers but if so it would be interesting to hear from you .
    • 0
      Of course it's possible.. replies to Lunds and Bagel
      | 1 reply
      Happens with SEC securities fraud cases all the time.


      A lifetime ban from similar types of businesses has been part of other FTC settlements in cases of organized fraud.  

      They have a strong incentive to "voluntarily" agree, if the alternative is paying fines and illgotten gain with money they no longer have.  When you run out of money, you can't buy much defence, and since this is a civil lawsuit, you don't have any "right to an attorney" if you can't afford one.  You either "agree", or the court forces something worse down your throat.

      A consent agreement approved by the court has the same force of law as if the court ruled against you.
      • 0
        Here's an example.. replies to Of course it's possible..
        Looks like they made an offer they couldn't refuse.

        http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2012/03/rumson.shtm
        ..."
        For Release: 03/15/2012
        As a Result of FTC Action, Two Defendants in Abusive Debt Collection Case Are Banned from the Industry, Will Surrender Assets
        ..."

        http://www.ftc.gov/os/caselist/1123035/120315rumsonorder.pdf
        "...
        “Settling Defendant” means defendant Frank E. Lindstrom, Jr.

        ORDER
        DEBT COLLECTION BAN
        I. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Settling Defendant, whether acting
        directly or through any other person, is permanently restrained and enjoined
        from:
        A. Engaging in debt collection activities or assisting others engaged in
        debt collection activities;
        B. Advertising, marketing, promoting, offering for sale, or selling any
        debt collection products or services; and
        C. Assisting others engaged in advertising, marketing, promoting,
        offering for sale, or selling any debt collection products or services;
        ..."

        http://www.ftc.gov/os/caselist/1123035/120315rumsonmedleyorder.pdf
        "...
        “Settling Defendant” means defendant Kevin Medley.

        ORDER
        DEBT COLLECTION BAN
        I. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Settling Defendant, whether acting
        directly or through any other person, is permanently restrained and enjoined
        from:
        A. Engaging in debt collection activities or assisting others engaged in
        debt collection activities;
        B. Advertising, marketing, promoting, offering for sale, or selling any
        debt collection products or services; and
        C. Assisting others engaged in advertising, marketing, promoting,
        offering for sale, or selling any debt collection products or services;
        ..."
  • 0
    Sounds
    | 4 replies
    Like these guys will get away with small fines due to lack of income like in the above posts,and zero jail time and a ban from working in debt collections but I think they could get a relative to put in their name just the same or can they literally not even be an employee of a collection firm either?
    • 0
      The language is pretty clear.. replies to Sounds
      | 3 replies
      "...IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Settling Defendant,

      whether acting directly or through any other person,

      is permanently restrained and enjoined from:

      A. Engaging in debt collection activities or assisting others engaged in debt collection activities;

      B. Advertising, marketing, promoting, offering for sale, or selling any debt collection products or services; and

      C. Assisting others engaged in advertising, marketing, promoting,offering for sale, or selling any debt collection products or services;
      ..."

      If you can't "engage in" and you can't "assist others engaged in", "acting directly or through any other person", "debt collection activities", "marketing", "promoting", "offering for sale", "selling", "any debt collection products", "or services"

      Then what, exactly, is left?  

      Looks like "being an employee" and "getting a relative to put in their name" is quite thoroughly covered in being "permanently enjoined".

      Got old copies of that "best script ever" you want to pass on to a friend?  Looks like that's covered.

      Looks like they can't even go into the "FDPCA compliance training" business, since that is "assisting others engaged in debt collection activities".

      Heck, maybe they can't even talk about old times and how they used to "play cop", with those in the "industry", over lunch?  Even that could be covered, under "assisting others engaged in debt collection activities".

      Oh, they might be able to buy stock in a publicly traded debt collection company, as long as they had no role in it in any way, shape, or form.

      It's really time to be "born again", and start a new life.
      • 0
        they just switch it up replies to The language is pretty clear..
        | 2 replies
        Although, the FTC may have banned them from engaging in the debt/telemarketing industry nothing stops them from just starting another fraudulent business as long as it doesn't involve debt collection.
        For instance:  Attorney Walter Villaume owned and operated Preferred Credit Corp in Irvine CA.
        In 2000 the DRE shut him down and he was told he could never do any business in the mortgage field again.
        Shortly, thereafter he opens CREDIT FOUNDATION OF AMERICA a debt consolidation company in Irvine Ca. In 2006 the FTC fines him and his associates over 1 million  in fines for illegally calling  people and telemarketing fraud. In 2006 they had over 10,000 complaints to the FTC. At this time they are still very much in business. My point is they just run from one scam to another and it is very hard to stop them.
        • 0
          If all we can do is keep them running, then keep them running.

          Did he lose his bar license?
        • 0
          Many scams depend on an element of "debt collection" or at least creating the appearance of it.  For example, the "magazine subscription termination fee" shakedowns, the fake "business directory" or "toner scam" frauds, and the notorious "Rachel" "lower your interest rates" scam both are built on "bait and switch" using collection threats to close and keep the money.  

          A lot of other telemarketing fraud tosses in threats of "sending it to collection" or "credit damage" when the routine deception through confusion isn't enough.

          The end game for these frauds is an extortion play.

          If they are just polymorphic swindlers, then knocking them out of "debt collection" might raise the penalties on their other scams as well.

Post a new comment