Join us on Google + Join us

Posts Tagged ‘debt collectors’

Solicitors to Become Unpaid Debt Collectors?

Wednesday, August 1st, 2012

Solicitors have said they could become unpaid debt collectors as a result of proposed legislation aimed at making more people contribute towards their criminal legal aid.

Scottish Government proposals, if passed, will mean people who have disposable income of £68 a week must make a financial contribution, which is unfair, according to the Law Society of Scotland. It also objects to solicitors having to collect the contributions themselves.

Oliver Adair, convener of the society’s legal negotiation team, said the legislation would leave them as unpaid debt collectors and insisted that the Scottish Legal Aid Board should be the “obvious body” for collecting such money.

The Scottish Government has published draft legislation with the stated aim of saving £3.9 million from the legal aid budget. Anyone with disposable income under £68 a week would pay nothing towards the cost of legal aid, according to the Scottish Civil Justice and Criminal Legal Assistance Bill.

A contribution would be paid if disposable income is above £68 but under £222 a week. Above the upper limit, assistance will only be given if the board considers that contributing money would still cause “undue hardship”.

The Scottish Government has said about 80% of people receiving legal aid would continue to pay nothing and that the Bill would end a situation where contributions are collected for civil cases but not for criminal cases.

Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill has said that it is “right and proper that those who can afford to pay towards the cost of their legal defence costs do so”.

Mr Adair agreed that those who can afford to contribute should do so, but said:

“The Bill proposes the threshold for determining whether a contribution is payable should be £68 disposable income a week. We do not believe that is a realistic amount from which to expect anybody to pay towards their legal costs.”

“We also have concerns around some of the areas which would be included in disposable income calculations, such as disability living allowance and war pensions. This would mean some of the most vulnerable people who rely on legal aid could have to pay a sizeable contribution towards the cost of their defence directly from their benefit payments.”

“The Bill as its stands would leave solicitors as unpaid public debt collectors. The Scottish Legal Aid Board is the obvious body for collecting the contributions. After all, they already collect contributions in civil legal aid cases and have procedures in place to carry out large-scale collection of contributions.”

OFT to Close Rogue Debt Collectors

Friday, July 20th, 2012

The Office of Fair Trading is being given the power to instantly stop rogue money lenders, debt collectors and debt advice firms from operating.

The government has decided to amend the Financial Services Bill, which is currently in the Lords, so that the OFT now has the power to suspend firms’ consumer credit licences with immediate effect.

At the moment appeals can hold up such decisions by up to two years.

Consumers’ association Which? said the move was a “good step forwards”.

Richard Lloyd, executive director of Which? said:

“Our research has found that people taking out payday loans are often caught in a downward spiral of debt.”

“So it is important that the Office of Fair Trading will have the power to instantly suspend the credit licences of unscrupulous lenders caught breaking the existing rules.”

The OFT’s powers will stay in place until the regulation of consumer credit businesses is transferred to the new Financial Conduct Authority in April 2014.

The Consumer Affairs Minister, Norman Lamb, said:

“This will put a stop to those companies who exploit vulnerable consumers whilst dragging matters through a slow legal process.”

“It will also give a boost to legitimate businesses, with the swift suspension of unscrupulous traders.

“The new measure is part of a concerted approach to strengthen protection around consumer credit, including issues such as payday lending and debt management.”

In the past decade there have been numerous attempts by the OFT to regulate the rapidly growing “industries” of short-term money lending, loan-broking, debt collection and debt advice.

But despite clear rules of conduct being in place for a long time, the industries are still plagued by rogues who ignore the rules for as long as possible.

Lee Manning, of the insolvency professionals trade body R3, said the new power for the OFT should be applauded, saying:

“This will hit rogue companies who provide goods or services on credit, lend money, collect debts or help people with debts.”

“This includes payday loan and debt management companies who break the rules – they have arrived in force on the internet and on our High Streets, while regulation has been slow to keep up.”

Sarah Brooks of Consumer Focus said:

“Companies under threat of losing their consumer credit licence have no incentive to improve their behaviour and some use the appeal process to gain more time to cash in at their customers’ expense.”

“It isn’t often that the regulator resorts to taking away licences, but it is a vital tool to have if it feels firms are not playing fair with their customers.”

Source: Debt Collection News

£174 Million Owed in Congestion Charges

Thursday, July 12th, 2012

New data shows that over £170 million is owed in unpaid congestion charges in London.

According to Transport for London (TfL) in 2011-12 drivers of 33,684 vehicles had not paid, down from 52,103 the year before. In 2009-10, it was 30,809. The figures also show that since the scheme was set up in 2003, almost £900m has been made in net profit.

In the last year, debt collectors have approached nearly 28,000 drivers for payment. Cameras which recognise number plates are used to detect all vehicles entering the zone which spans central London between 0700 and 1800 GMT on weekdays.

The congestion charge is £10 per day, but if you do not pay on the day it rises to £12, while if drivers register for the automated payment system it is £9.

The figures show that motorists have paid over £2.4bn in charges and penalties since 2003. The profit, after money is reinvested into the transport network, is almost £900m. Figures also show that in the last three years, just under 200,000 charge certificates have been sent out which warns people that if they do not pay, TfL will engage debt collectors.

A spokesman for the Association of British Drivers said he was not surprised that there was a massive debt.

He said:

“This is something TfL have to deal with. It’s their idea, their baby so it’s something they should have considered when they set it up.”

Mayor Boris Johnson, said:

“I can imagine Londoners will be clamouring for us to crack down and send more letters in the post and get them [those in arrears] to cough up.

“We will be on to it and I will find out why there is such a big gap in our collecting and we will levy those revenues, if we possibly can.”

Nick Fairholme, TfL’s director of congestion charging and traffic enforcement, said:

“We are satisfied that the enforcement process for non-payment of the congestion charge works well and we are confident that the overwhelming majority of drivers who drive within the zone pay to do so.”

“A significant amount of the outstanding £174m is owed by diplomatic missions, some of whom are still refusing to pay the charge.”

“TfL will continue to pursue all unpaid fees and related penalty charge notices from diplomatic missions and we are seeking to pursue the matter via the International Courts of Justice.”

Meanwhile Westminster City Council – which has always opposed the congestion charge – said it had £35.6m outstanding in parking fines in the zone.

The council said not all of the money was recoverable because it is owed by foreign drivers, untraceable cars or persistent evaders who continue to ignore the law.

Councillor Daniel Astaire said:

“It is still only a minority of motorists who chose not to pay their way.”

“But this still has a direct impact on the levels of congestion in the capital as those who don’t follow the rules are selfishly taking up road and parking space for those who abide by the law.”

“In Westminster we are continuing to establish a firm but fair approach to enforcement, but this is difficult when some of the millions who journey into central London every day choose only to think of themselves.”

Source: Debt Collection News

Crazed Gunman Executes Bailiffs in Germany

Thursday, July 5th, 2012

A gunman in Germany yesterday executed two bailiffs, a locksmith and a woman by shooting them in the head before taking his own life after an attempted eviction from his home.

One of the dead was believed to be the killer’s ex-girlfriend, who owned the flat and who took out the eviction order.

The hostage drama began shortly after 9am in the south-western city of Karlsruhe, when court-appointed officials arrived at the loft apartment in the city’s Kanalweg district to enforce the order.

According to reports the gunman was a hunter and had a small arsenal of weapons including a hand grenade. He was heard by neighbours to shout at the bailiffs:

“You want my home, it will cost you your life.”

Officers of the elite SEK police commando squad, 40 in all, surrounded the apartment building after sealing nearby roads. More than 200 police were involved in the operation and a police helicopter hovered overhead during the three-hour standoff. It is understood no lines of communication were opened and the victims were probably killed when the first gunshots were heard soon after 9am.

The man barricaded his flat with furniture and SEK officers stormed it shortly after midday when they noticed smoke. There was no gunfight. A kindergarten and school near the apartment block were also evacuated. A police spokesman said: “We are looking at five dead in the apartment.  The threat is now over.”

Seven pastoral care workers and priests moved into the area after the siege ended to break the news of deaths to loved ones and offer counselling.  One of them, Catholic worker Peter Bitsch, said:

“We must care for those directly and indirectly affected by this terrible tragedy.”

Debt Collectors Attacked by Machete Wielding Thug

Monday, June 18th, 2012

A thug wielding a machete has robbed two debt collectors as they made their rounds.

The masked attacker struck as the man and woman were outside a flat near Park Road in Sale. He demanded money, mobile phones and car keys before running off in the direction of Firs Road.

Police are appealing for witnesses to the theft, which happened at 11.25am on May 29.

Det Con David Wood said:

“It is unthinkable for most people to be confronted by such violence when simply going about their daily job. I would therefore appeal to anyone who might have information about this robbery to come forward. I want to hear from anyone who either witnessed the robbery itself, or perhaps someone saw a man fitting this description hanging around the area. If do you have any information then please call us.”

The attacker was white, 5ft 7, of medium build, and wore black leather gloves, a black hat and a thin cotton scarf over his face.

Anyone with information should call police on 0161 856 7652 or Crimestoppers, anonymously, on 0800 555 111.

Source: Debt Collection News

CFPB to Supervise US Debt Collectors

Wednesday, February 22nd, 2012

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, or CFPB, has announced a proposed rule to include debt collectors and consumer reporting agencies under its nonbank supervision program. According to the CFPB, this would mark the first time these important and far-reaching consumer financial market participants are subject to federal supervision.    

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, which created the CFPB, authorizes the CFPB to supervise non-banks in the specific markets of residential mortgage, payday lending, and private education lending. In addition, for other nonbank markets for consumer financial products or services, the CFPB has the authority to supervise “larger participants.” As directed by Dodd-Frank, the Bureau must define such “larger participants” by rule, and an initial such rule must be issued by July 21, 2012. Last summer, the CFPB sought public comment about possible markets to include in the initial rule and available data sources the Bureau could use to define larger participants in - markets.

Under the proposed rule, debt collectors with more than $10 million in annual receipts from debt collection activities would be subject to supervision. Based on available data, the CFPB estimates that the proposed rule would cover approximately 175 debt collection firms — or 4 percent of debt collection firms — and that these firms account for 63 percent of annual receipts from the debt collection market.

Under the proposed rule, consumer debt collection or reporting agencies with more than $7 million in annual receipts from consumer reporting activities would be subject to supervision. This would include approximately 7 percent of consumer reporting agencies based on available data. The proposed threshold would allow the CFPB to cover about 30 consumer reporting agencies. The CFPB estimates that these 30 companies account for about 94 percent of the annual receipts from consumer reporting.

This is the CFPB’s first in a series of rulemakings to define larger participants. The CFPB chose annual receipts as the criterion for both debt collection and consumer reporting because it approximates market participation in these two markets. As the CFPB adds new markets, it will choose the best criteria and the appropriate thresholds for each market.

CSA to be Consulted in OFT Guidance for Debt Collectors

Wednesday, May 11th, 2011

In the forthcoming update to the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) Guidance for Debt Collectors, which is expected in the latter part of the year, it has been announced that the Credit Services Association (CSA), who are the voice of the Debt Collection industry in the UK, will be consulted as a key stakeholder.

The CSA’s Code of practice, which was originally published in 2003, has had large parts of it’s content used as the basis for the new Guidance. It is expected that the new Guidance will have clearer instructions around data accuracy and a specific section dedicated to debt purchase according to CSA’s Head of Membership, Compliance and Educational Services, Claire Aynsley:

“It is vital that the consultation has insight from those in the collections and debt purchase sectors who have front line knowledge of collecting debts in often challenging conditions,” she says.

“Members of the CSA, and colleagues within the Debt Sale & Sellers Group (DBSG) will help ensure that any future Guidance is properly informed, so that best practice can be highlighted to the ultimate benefit of all parties.”

Council Claws Back 1m in Benefit Payments

Tuesday, March 22nd, 2011

Council officers and debt collectors are trying to claw back £838,000 overpaid to benefit claimants in Bracknell last year.

The overpayments in housing and council tax benefit were made as a result of wrong information being given to Bracknell Forest Council.

The figure amounts to two per cent of the borough’s annual benefit budget.

Housing officers are working with claimants to get back most of the money but a debt collection agency has been hired to track down £250,000 of the total.

It also emerged that in previous years as much as four per cent of the council’s benefits budget had been overpaid.

Simon Hendey, the borough’s chief officer for housing, stressed that the council had repayment agreements with most claimants.

He said debt collectors were only being used when his officers had been unable to come to an agreement with claimants on repaying money or when claimants had disappeared.

Mr Hendey said: “We aim to make arrangements that are reasonable.”

He said that most of the errors in information related to claimants’ change of circumstances, with only a small number relating to false claims.

He added that only debts that were deemed unrecoverable would be written off.

Mr Hendey said: “There will be some overpayments that, as in any business, we try our best to recover but at some point it is not economic to continue as we will be spending more on trying to get back the debt.”

A recent audit commission report into the council’s benefit service awarded it a “fair service with promising prospects for improvement”.

However in its report in September 2010 the commission did criticise the management of the housing benefit overpayment debt, stating that “prompt action to recover overpayments helps to reduce the cost of running services to local taxpayers”.

In the report, the work on detecting and preventing fraud was described as good and the council’s customer care was fair with staff seen as polite, knowledgeable and helpful.

The borough’s housing department is sending out 1,100 letters to tenants in private rented accommodation advising them of the changes to local housing allowance brought in by the coalition Government.

The borough council has held meetings with the town’s Citizens Advice Bureau about the reduction in the allowance from April 1 which will affect tenants in larger, more costly rented properties.

Student loan debt collectors?

Friday, August 27th, 2010

Students may soon be confronted by debt collectors on their doorsteps.

A source inside the Ministry of Social Development has told The Wellingtonian the Government is considering using private debt collectors for collecting outstanding student loans.

Revenue Minister Peter Dunne has denied the claim, saying it would only apply to students living overseas.

The Government has engaged consultant company Burleigh Evatt to research private debt collection practices, and has also discussed creating a student finance company to manage the collection of student loans.

Last year in the Student Loan Annual Report, the Government recorded 30 per cent of student loans as an expense, given that they were unlikely to be repaid.

The Wellingtonian requested more information from several government ministers and departments about how the changes to student loans collection would work, but they proved extraordinarily evasive.

Questions about the proposal were sent as Official Information Act requests to Tertiary Education Minister Steven Joyce, Finance Minister Bill English, Social Welfare Minister Paula Bennett, the Treasury and the Inland Revenue Department.

All acknowledged receipt of the request except Ms Bennett’s office.

Mr English’s office informed us its request was being transferred to Mr Joyce and this was followed by the Inland Revenue Department transferring its request to both Mr Joyce’s and Ms Bennett’s offices.

The Treasury transferred the request to Ms Bennett and Education Minister Anne Tolley’s offices, neither of which acknowledged the request.Each time the request was transferred The Wellingtonian was told there would be another 20-day wait for a response.

When the 20 days to respond had expired, the only response we received from the Government was yet another transfer. Mr Joyce transferred the request at the last minute to Ms Bennett’s office.

Initially, when The Wellingtonian told Mr English’s office that we would be running a story on student loans, the office denied any talks about privatisation had taken place. Later that day Mr English’s spokesman demanded the right to comment before we published.

When we subsequently offered Mr English the chance to comment last Friday he declined and referred us to Ms Bennett. She also declined to comment, saying her office had never received the Official Information Act request. On Monday she then passed us on to Revenue Minister Peter Dunne.

Mr Dunne provided a brief written response to our inquiries about administration of the student loans on Tuesday.

“The Government aims to improve services,” he said. “Part of that includes the efficient administration of student loans and ensuring that all loan borrowers repay their loans in a timely manner.”

Mr Dunne denied the Government was planning to create a private student loan company, but said private debt collection practices might be used to collect from overseas borrowers.

“Regularity of payments tends to slip especially when borrowers move overseas,” he said.

“To improve the efficiency, officials have been investigating a number of options, including the possibility of private debt collecting.”

WHAT HASN’T BEEN CONFIRMED

These are the questions which have still not received full answers:

  • What is the share structure of the proposed student finance company?Will it be state-owned, privately-owned or a mixture of both?
  • How will the shares be issued?Will they be offered to the public?
  • Has a preferred owner been established? If so who? Or would ownership be split between banks?
  • Would the student finance company be empowered to deduct money directly from an employee’s pay or would the Inland Revenue Department still collect it?
  • When is the proposed student finance company expected to take over student loan collections?

Additional questions were also sent to Ms Bennett’s office last Friday. They were:

  • Will the payment exemption for low-income earners continue?
  • Will the company have the same power to impose late payment penalties and penalty interest as the Inland Revenue Department?
  • Will the company be able to seize property or other assets?
  • Will the company be able to restrain the travel of people with student loan debts?

Proposal on Buying Old Debt Opposed

Friday, July 16th, 2010

State Sen. William Stachowski, D-Lake View, says concern about losing Western New York bill collection jobs is the reason he opposes the bill to clamp down on the industry.

A Democratic state lawmaker from Buffalo, the state’s banks and the region’s burgeoning debt-collection industry are fighting a proposal in Albany to tighten state collections rules, reduce lawsuits and prevent abusive tactics by debt-buying firms.

A bill sponsored by two Democrats would impose new requirements on buyers of old debt before they can file lawsuits against debtors and obtain default judgments against them. It would also limit the amount of time debt collectors can collect on old debts.

Banks say the bill would force them to go to court sooner to collect debts and thus make the process more expensive. But supporters say the legislation is intended to plug holes in existing law and address abuses that consumer advocates say harm low-income, elderly and minority consumers.

“It would help to curb a lot of these abusive practices,” said Josh Zinner, co-director of the Neighborhood Economic Development Advocacy Project in New York City, which released a report in late May with three other groups, laying out the abuses. “We see it as a real critical piece of legislation.”

They insist the bill would not stop creditors and collectors from pursuing legitimate debt, as long as they are doing it properly and fairly. “It wouldn’t at all impact legitimate debt collection,” Zinner said.

The bill has been blocked by State Sen. William Stachowski, D-Lake View, who is concerned about jobs in Western New York, where debt collectors employ 10,000. He said the bill doesn’t differentiate between “the legitimate bill collectors and the ones who are causing the problems.” A Long Island senator is also opposed.

“I don’t want to see all the thousands of jobs in Western New York leave,” Stachowski said. “We have a lot of people who are getting back into the job market and can work at these places. This bill would just devastate that whole industry.”

Banks and debt-buyers are raising strenuous opposition. Debt collectors say the bill would actually backfire on consumers, forcing creditors and debt collectors to file more lawsuits immediately upon default to ensure that they don’t miss out on the debt. They also say that the bill would drive up costs for debt collectors, hindering their ability to cut deals with consumers down the road.

“I don’t know if consumers realize that that may be the impact of this,” said Barbara Sinsley, general counsel to DBA International, a trade group. “The strategy is going to be harmful to consumers because the debt collectors and the creditors don’t have a choice.”

Banks say the bill would accelerate the process of sending debt to an outside collector instead of keeping it with a lender who probably has other relationships with the customer aside from debt collection. And they say it would result in more harm to consumers’ credit records and less likelihood that consumers who eventually want to pay debts will do so.

M&T Bank Corp. and HSBC Bank USA reached out to Stachowski, who said he received a letter from M&T CEO Robert G. Wilmers.

“These changes would have the effect of making it far more difficult and expensive to collect debt owed on consumer credit contracts in New York, reducing consumers’ access to credit and raising its cost,” the New York Bankers Association said in a memo opposing the bill.

The bill passed the Assembly on June 16 and is pending in the Senate. It’s sponsored by Sen. Eric Schneiderman, a downstate Democrat, who is also running for state Attorney General. The state Legislature completed its session early this month, but the Senate has to come back to finish the revenue portions of the budget.

The practices of debt collectors have long been a source of controversy, as firms proclaim their right to ensure that consumers pay what they owe while consumer advocates decry the methods that are sometimes used. In particular, advocates denounce debt buyers — firms that purchase old debts for pennies on the dollar and then keep whatever they collect.

According to the advocates’ May report, debt buyers “routinely” violate state law by filing meritless lawsuits against low-and moderate-income consumers without proof of their claims and without proper notice to them that they are being sued. As a result, the report said, consumers don’t appear, and debt buyers win default judgments nine times in 10.

The proposed Consumer Credit Fairness Act would require that debtors be properly served with notice from the court of a lawsuit against them, giving them a chance to defend themselves.

The legislation would require collectors to submit more information to the court and lay out the facts about the debt, including proving they own it or have the right to collect it.

Finally, the bill would cut the statute of limitations for debt collection to three years from six, identical to Arizona, Arkansas, Delaware, Kansas, Louisiana and Maryland. And it would eliminate any right to collect after that expires, as in Wisconsin and Mississippi.

Investors in People logo Office of Fair Trading Website Information Commissioner's Office Website International Accreditation Board Website
Federation of European National Collection Associations Association of Credit and Collection Professionals logo Credit Services Association Website
Federal Management Debt Collection 4.8 based on 112 user reviews.