False collection
Complaint
Paul DeMott
Country: United States
I am the executor of my father's estate. Within one month of his death in 2007, I received a collection notice from AFNI claiming that my father owed Verizon a bill of over $6000.00 for a telephone line that was operative for several months in 1997 (ten years ago). The line was located in a state where my father has never lived.
I had managed my father's affairs for several years prior to his death and had never received a bill from Verizon. I checked his credit report and found that there were no bills reported as past due.
As I have checked on the internet, I have found numerous other reports of attempts by AFNI to collect bogus bills. I find it very suspicious that within two weeks of my father's death, AFNI receives a bill for collection that is nearly ten years old.
I had managed my father's affairs for several years prior to his death and had never received a bill from Verizon. I checked his credit report and found that there were no bills reported as past due.
As I have checked on the internet, I have found numerous other reports of attempts by AFNI to collect bogus bills. I find it very suspicious that within two weeks of my father's death, AFNI receives a bill for collection that is nearly ten years old.
Comments
Your name, or address (current or past) might be similar to some old account. Name might be spelled differently, initials different, whatever, they don't care. They send a bill, and are probably sending bills to a bunch of people with names similar to yours on the same account.
They claim each one owes them this "debt". They are often reported to claim it is too late to request proof. They may be claiming you have been sent many letters. (maybe they mean you and all your similarly named "clones"?)
They sent a bill to a dog in Sacramento whose name matched some Verizon account customer on the east coast, when an Amex customer got a "family member" authorized user card in his dog's name as a joke. No SSN match, no address match, just similar name, anywhere in the country. That shows you what they are doing.
You say it isn't your account, they say it's obviously "id theft" but you have to prove it or pay them. They are the debt collection company with the highest number of FTC "id theft" complaints connected with them, probably because of the above "id theft" tactic.
When they send bills to people never on an account based on an address match, they may claim it is either "relative id theft", or "you authorized someone else to use your name". There are complaints of pulling this crap where consumers claim their connection with the alleged address was 5 or 10 years prior.
When asked fo validation, they are reported either to reply with a request for a bunch of identity information, claiming they won't "investigate" until it is sent, when they have the legal obligation to obtain validation.
Often they send "validation" containing only the name and amount allegedly due, missing any logo or letterhead to indicate it was ever obtained from the original creditor, missing account information or original billing address information that would indicate they are billing the wrong person, etc.
They work hard to appear to "avoid knowing" they are billing the wrong person, claiming that it is just a "mistake", or better, it's the consumer's fault.
Send a letter disputing the debt and requesing validation. Send it certified return receipt requested, immediately. Keep records of all communications, including proof of mailing and delivery. Contact your state AG and the Illinois AG should you have any problems.
There may or may not be an amount owed. It may or may not be owed by you. It may or may not be the account you think it is. Before paying anything, find out if you even owe it, and what it is for.
Be aware that AFNI has been reported to alter names of alleged debtors in their collection of old Verizon accounts. They have sent collection bills to people whose names were NOT on alleged accounts, with the only connection being that they once may have lived at the account address. They have also sent bills to people who just had similar names to some old account, often never even living in the same city or state of the alleged account. When challenged, they are reported to just call it "id theft", then claim you have to prove you don't owe it or pay them.
In your case they might easily claim you owe some old account with only your son's name on it by skip-tracing your son to having had a common address with you, or claiming you "cosigned" on some account even if you never did.
Sending you a bill falsely claiming you owe some debt on an account your name was never on is technically mail fraud, but they seldom provide verifiable original account information that might prove their deceipt. They are reported to send their own "verification" letter, allowing them to leave off or alter original creditor information that would be present in an original statement, for example.
Because of numerous reports of the above types of "errors", you cannot trust any documentation provided by AFNI that cannot be traced back to the original creditor. In particular, you cannot trust any letter generated by AFNI itself claiming they "verified" you owe anything.
Your first step is to send AFNI a letter disputing the debt and requesting that they send you proof that you owe it obtained from the original creditor. Send it certified return receipt requested, so you have proof that you mailed it within 30 days of receiving their first letter, and proof of when they got it.
According to FDCPA, they must cease all collection activity until they obtain and send proof you owe it. That includes sending collection demands, phone calls, or credit reporting or verifying. Therefore, on their receipt of your request, check your credit reports to see if they have tarnished them, and dispute any negative information they have posted.
They are reported to attempt to deflect validation requests by sending responses claiming the consumer has not provided enough information to investigate the claim. This is a deceptive response, as FDCPA places no such requirements on consumers requesting validation. If you receive it file complaints with FTC, your state Attorney General, and the Illinois Attorney General.
There is a federal class action lawsuit against them in 3 states over this type of deceptive validation request response. Contact www.edcombs.com for more information.
http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2 ... _sdt=2&as_vis=1
"...
CONCLUSION
The Court finds that AFNI's statements in its form letter are "false, misleading, or deceptive" in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e, and AFNI is not entitled to assert the bona fide error defense under 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(c). Accordingly, Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability under § 1692e of the FDCPA is GRANTED and Defendant's motion for summary judgment is DENIED.
..."
mpany that was left unpaid...there are so many complaints on the internet over people that are just upset that they didnt pay there bills when they was suppose to ..
You incorporate, you pay your money to the Secretary of State, and you are a "true company".
You can be a "true company" all you want, but if you dumped your "trash" on your neighbors' property, they would be mad at you, as they should. You dump your trash "debt" claims on the credit reports of anyone you think you can get away with doing it to, whith little regard to the damage you do. When they complain (dispute under FDCPA), you send them deceptive letters rather than clean up your own mess.
Summary judgement decision in class action lawsuit, Hale v. AFNI.
http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2 ... _sdt=2&as_vis=1
"...
CONCLUSION
The Court finds that AFNI's statements in its form letter are "false, misleading, or deceptive" in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e, and AFNI is not entitled to assert the bona fide error defense under 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(c). Accordingly, Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability under § 1692e of the FDCPA is GRANTED and Defendant's motion for summary judgment is DENIED.
..."
http://dockets.justia.com/search?query=afni&s ... rtdatefirst=yes
Note cases where the defendant is both AFNI and "Does". These would likely involve attempts to obtain through discovery the true names of employees who might also be personally liable in the action.
FDCPA statutory liability would be up to $1000 per action, plus damages, but that would be per defendant.
Dateline investigation.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-HNWiY1Isw
Debt collector/extortion racket using common debt collection deception tactics.
https://complaintwire.org/Complaint.aspx/kBftIIqR-QAJ_wjMpvkYrw
https://complaintwire.org/Complaint.aspx/IDDUf49WgwDukQjMvFILqA
https://complaintwire.org/Complaint.aspx/ok3kfrawxwDthAjMf85qbg
From the Judge's decision:
"...
AFNI's statements in its form letter are "false, misleading, or deceptive" in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e
..."
And apparently you don't learn. You used the same "bona fide error" defense as you used in "Seeger", with the same result.
http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2 ... _sdt=2&as_vis=1
"...
The form letter at issue was drafted by AFNI's compliance manager, Lisa Anderson. (Id. at 4:17-18, 9:3-14.)
...
Additionally, in a recent case involving AFNI, the Seventh Circuit held that procedures comparable to those cited by AFNI in this case did not entitle AFNI to succeed on its bona fide error defense. See Seeger v. AFNI, Inc., 548 F.3d 1107 (7th Cir. 2009).
...
The Court finds that AFNI's statements in its form letter are "false, misleading, or deceptive" in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e, and AFNI is not entitled to assert the bona fide error defense under 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(c).
..."
They get angry when they get one they don't.
When someone lies to them, trying to cheat or con them, they get angry.
You sent out millions of collection letters hoping they would all be going to stupid sheep.
Most people actually pay their debts, most people know they have done so for years, and they even know who they did business with, so when faced with your suspicious letters and employees answering questions with just talk-offs, they start doing research. They find they are not alone, that you have been pulling the same cr*p on others for years, and they are ANGRY.