866-279-6888

yes I did sayn I was going to court

4 1/2 years of being sworn at, threatened, and bullied by this firm under different names and numbers for a Natasha Hill's debt.  I do not know this person, and no matter how many times I tell them this, they continue to call.  They will not provide an address to send a certified letter requesting the calls stop, which is against the law, per the FTC.    The REAL name of this "law firm" is Advanced Data Mining Solutions.  Their address is: 305 Cayuga Rd., Buffalo, NY 14225.  I have a land line number of: 716-568-7173, and toll-free numbers of 866-279-6888 and 877-847-6680.  Please note even if you DO owe a debt, there is NO SUCH THING AS DEBTOR'S PRISON.  You can not be sent to jail for owing anything, and any court summons for a judgement against you MUST be served physically, NOT over the phone.  Report these guys as harassing calls and/or extortion, if possible.  File a complaint with the FTC at the very least.  Now that I have the actual info, I am pursuing legal action against them.

This company and one other (National Debt) has been calling me for over a year, they tried once to get me to pay some outstanding payday loan they claim is in my name and some "bad checks" they claim I wrote. They state they are calling on behalf of an attorney, yet they won't give me an address or let me talk to me "debtors" myself. They claimed that they have affidavits with my signature affirming that my signatures are on the checks and the payday loan. Yes when my husband and I separated I wrote checks and he in turn took all the money out of our account before they were cashed, but I have no payday loans in my name etc. I told them that divorce court would figure out who owes the bank that money for the checks and that in no way was I paying for a payday loan I don't have, and to stop calling on a number that is not even listed to me! That I have contacted my attorney and was told to do nothing they asked and let them know I was reporting them for harassment. In turn the woman began to yell at me, tell me she didn't need my ignorant attitude and then hung up on me. I then called back and let the receptionist or whoever answers the phone to take down my file number and tell the woman I spoke to (she wouldn't give me her full name) to take the phone number she has for me off the list as it is not mine, and that my attorney will be in touch about harassment charges.

I have received calls for people I don't know.  I've called numerous times to get them to remove my number from their records but I still receive at least one call a day from them.

866-279-6888
Law Office of Scott Wheat

877-847-6680
Law Office of Scott Wheat

716-568-7173
Law Office of Scott Wheat

the 866 or 877 is from their prior name of the company known as the nr group they recently changed their name to the law office of scott wheat which you will all see the 716 area code....don't let them fool you by saying "you were talking to someone from the nr group and they transferred the paperwork to us for final resolutions" they are full of [***]. they are the same collectors making 11-18/hr plus bonus if they collect your money and reach their goal with it. i would advise all of you not to pay anything without a letter and then go to your attorney to see what they have to say before you decide to hand over your credit card or checking info over the phone. send in money orders of $5.00 if you have to but then dan chirayath will get on the phone (the telephone tuff guy) and then slam it in your face. don't call back if he does this because he gets off on that; he also has warrants out for his arrest.

From other postings, it seems that National Recovery Group or NR Group has changed their name to "The Law Office of Scott Wheat," in what may be an attempt to trick people into believing that the people placing the calls are lawyers, which would be a serious FDCPA violation.  In various 800notes postings, people have stated than these debt collectors announce that they are calling "from the Law Office of Scott Wheat."  This may falsely implies they are lawyers or that perhaps they are working for a lawyer.  When questioned whether they were an attorney or not, they have referred to themselves as "litigators."  This may falsely implies that they are someone who practices law.

According to various sources, this company has identified or registered themselves as:

"The Law Office of Scott Wheat"
"The Law Office of Scott and Wheat"
"Advanced Data Mining Solutions"
"Southern Capital and Associates"
"NRG Billing, LLC"
"NRG & Associates"
"National Recovery Group"
"NR Group"

The listed address is the same as National Recovery Group's or NR Group's address of:

305 Cayuga Rd., Buffalo, NY 14225

The numbers that "The Law Office of Scott Wheat" are reported as using are:
866-279-6888
877-847-6680 (one of NR Group's old numbers)
716-568-7173
877-877-3074
716-568-7173
877-847-6675 (one of NR Group's old numbers)
877-847-6674 (one of NR Group's old numbers)
716-362-4898 (one of NR Group's old numbers)
877-847-6679 (one of NR Group's old numbers)
716-565-2316

If you want more postings on NR Group, AKA, National Recovery Group, look up these numbers:
877-847-6680
877-847-6681
716-362-4891
716-362-4898
716-565-2319
877-847-6675
877-847-6674
877-847-6679

It appears that NR Group or National Recovery Group may have reincorporated themselves once again.  If it's like their last three re-births, they are running from lawsuits by changing their name.

I hope to raise this issue when I next meet with the New York AG.

I just received a phone message from the Law Office of Scott Wheat telling me to call them IMMEDIATELY!!  to settle case No """" and that they were "affording" me the opportunity to settle my case before trial.... IM GOING TO TRIAL???!! REALLY???? That's funny I have not been served any papers nor has any discovery taken place (necessary process for trial)  I'm a Paralegal and I plan to have a little fun with this guy when I call him back. He's said in his voicemail that he is a Litigator and I'm guessing that he's NOT.  I plan to ask for his Texas License No. and then point out the Texas laws for debt collection. Thank God I work right next to the law library. This should be interesting.

Please keep us informed.  In Texas, collectors are required to post a bond with the AG to operate as a debt collector.  You should keep careful records and record all calls to/from these people.  Fortunately, in Texas you are lucky in that you are permitted to record telephone calls without the consent of the other party.  From the telephone message, it appears that they have already violated the FDCPA in at least three ways, each of which could result in a cash award or setttlement back to you if you bring it to court.  In Texas, there is no wage garnishment for not paying a consumer debt, so if they threaten garnishment, they are lying and violating the FDCPA.  Also, the Texas courts have become very friendly to consumers, lawyers, and law enforcement personnel combating debt collection abuse and fraud.

Woman Sues Debt Collector, Wins $8.1 Million

by Rogers Cadenhead
Monday, April 05, 2010 at 09:37 AM

At courthouses across the United States, it has become increasingly common during the economic downturn for lawsuits to be filed against consumers to collect old debts. Lawyers who specialize in the practice are filing thousands of suits on behalf of large firms that have acquired debts from other companies. Although most people don't fight the suits and lose them by default, a Dallas woman bucked the trend last October.

Chrystal A. Snow challenged the validity of a $9,000 debt in a Dallas County Court-at-Law and countersued the debt collector for making improper phone calls, her attorney Ross Teter said. In a case that has received no media attention, Snow won her suit against Midland Funding LLC and the jury hearing the case awarded her $8.1 million -- $250 for actual damages, $100,000 for mental anguish and $8 million in punitive damages, he said.

"The jury made a finding she did not owe the debt," Teter said in a phone interview. "We argued that they violated the Texas Fair Debt Collection Act by making harassing phone calls and the jury agreed."

Complete article at: http://watchingthewatchers.org/read/3610

I received several calls from Dave who said he worked for Scott B Wheat law office.  Telephone number 877-877-3074.  He left a recorded message that if I did not call him back then he assumed that I wanted the case forwarded to the County.  He then resorted to calling my friends stating that I needed to contact them.  This company is unprofessional and need some customer service training. I intend on sending this to my lawyer since it seems liek a form of harrassment and misrepresentation.

I receive calls daily from this company stating they want to give me an offer on a payday loan that is in collections. These people tell anyone who answers the phone at work who they are & why they are calling, how rude! No everyone at work thinks I have lawyers after me for money. These people also tell me if I don't give them a payment over the phone that a police officer is going to come to my work & arrest me. The first time this really scared me think about how many people get scared & fall for it!!

Do you have the FDC contact info? This is getting crazy!

Sorry FTC!

Add
866-279-6888 (5/10/10) & 716-568-7173 (5/10/10)
Slightly different this time-left message for me to call re: case #------ with ext. #502 (was busy at time as
the Tornado sirens were going off)...
Getting calls from this number will not leave message on answering machine.  Also when answered recorded voice says this is an important message for.... (No name given) then silence and the machine hangs up...Number is now blocked.  As we have no outstanding debts there is no reason to be calling us.  This is this the third number I have reported in less than a month all have been similar all are blocked...also see phone #'s NCO Financial Services 443-550-7955(4/24/10) & 866-360-7475(4/27/10); TFZ, LLC 909-842-8106 (5/6/10) & 408-587-2198; Name Unavailable 224-000-8956 (5/6/10) & 866-296-7952 (5/6/10) Name Unavailable.  WE ARE ALSO ON THE STATE AND NATIONAL DO NOT CALL LISTS BOTH HOME AND CELL.

You need to go to the NY Attorney General's office and report this.  Also file a complaint with the FTC.  Threatening arrest is a serious violation.  Search on youtube the words "debt collector" and "dateline" for a complete report on what happened to another debt collector doing the same thing.

bad check with case number
i am using a friends phone and have NOT written any checks in years,
and never a bad check!

It seems that naming your collection agency, "The Law Offices as Scott B. Wheat," could be deceptive and could violate FDCPA in a way similar to the situation described in this court ruling.

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

Law Firm Letterhead Can Imply Threat, Magistrate Rules
Shannon P. Duffy

The Legal Intelligencer
June 18, 2010
Sometimes a letter can be deemed misleading just because it came from a lawyer.

A federal magistrate judge in the Middle District of Pennsylvania has ruled that lawyers who act as debt collectors cannot use their law firm letterhead for collection letters unless a lawyer has reviewed the file and the firm is truly poised to file a lawsuit.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Andrew J. Smyser ruled that two letters from a New York lawyer amounted to clear violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act because the use of law firm letterhead gave the false impression that a lawyer was working on the case and planning to sue.

"The least sophisticated consumer would be likely to believe upon receiving a communication from an attorney for the lender that the debt collection process has entered into a phase where the lender through its attorney will begin to use procedures established by law and known to attorneys to collect the debt," Smyser wrote in his 22-page opinion in Lesher v. Law Offices of Mitchell N. Kay.

"A law firm's letter does bear an implied threat of litigation, and does connote that it is a communication from an attorney," Smyser wrote.

Smyser rejected the argument that the letter could not be deemed misleading under the FDCPA because it included a sentence that explicitly said: "At this point in time, no attorney with this firm has personally reviewed the particular circumstances of your account."

Instead, Smyser said, "in our view, that language does not mitigate the impression of potential legal action."

Smyser granted summary judgment in favor of plaintiff Darwin Lesher on two of his FDCPA claims. By statute, the remedy for such claims is a $1,000 award to the plaintiff and an award of attorney fees.

Lesher is represented by Deanna Saracco, a sole practitioner in Enola, Pa., and Laurence J. Rosen of Krevsky & Rosen in Harrisburg, Pa. In an interview, Rosen said that he and Saracco have not yet filed their fee petition.

According to the suit, Lesher took out a home equity loan from Washington Mutual and fell behind on his payments. He now disputes the debt and how it was calculated.

Washington Mutual referred Lesher's file to attorney Mitchell Kay who sent letters to Lesher on his law firm's letterhead in January and February 2009.

The suit alleged that the use of law firm letterhead to collect consumer debts -- when there has not been attorney involvement or attorney review before collection letters are sent to consumers -- is a violation of §1692e(3) and (5).

It also alleged a violation of §1692g on the grounds that Kay's collection letter created a false sense of heightened urgency and intimidation, and that there had not been a meaningful review of the plaintiff's account.

In court papers, Kay's lawyer, Joann Needleman of Maurice & Needleman in Philadelphia, argued that Lesher's lawyers were making too much of the use of law firm letterhead and ignored significant case law that instructs judges to consider the entire communication.

"Plaintiff's entire case is based on the notion that no matter how innocuous or benign the substance of the letter, an implied threat of litigation will exist because the letter came from an attorney. Plaintiff provides this court with no legal support for this proposition, and ... fails to point to anything in the substance of either of the defendant's letters which would violate Section 1692e(5) by suggesting such a threat," Needleman wrote.

Needleman urged Smyser to adopt the reasoning of the 2005 decision in Greco v. Trauner Cohen & Thomas from the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals which held that a collection letter from a lawyer is not misleading if it contains a statement that no attorney has yet reviewed the account.

In that decision, Needleman said, the 2nd Circuit held that such language -- which was also included in Kay's letters -- was adequate to dispel a possible inference of the debtor that a particularized analysis had caused the attorney to have decided to pursue a collection process through litigation.

But Smyser found that case law from the 3rd Circuit says a debt collection letter is deceptive where it can be reasonably read to have two or more different meanings, one of which is inaccurate.

In Rosenau v. Unifund Corp., the 3rd Circuit applied the least sophisticated debtor standard in holding that a letter that closed with "Unifund Legal Department" in place of a signature could be read also falsely implying that it was from an attorney.

Refusing to apply the 2nd Circuit case, Smyser concluded that the use of law firm letterhead created a deceptive meaning.

"Although an attorney may be acting solely in the capacity of a debt collector and may not be communicating any explicit representation of a future course of action, when the attorney acting as a debt collector uses law firm letterhead the attorney acting as a debt collector plainly is communicating to the debtor in his or her capacity as an attorney," Smyser wrote.

"Therefore, since it is an attorney's communication, the implication is not avoidable that a threat of litigation is being presented to the debtor," Smyser wrote.

The least-sophisticated consumer, Smyser said, "would be likely to believe that the law firm is acting as an attorney for the lender in communicating with the consumer concerning the loan."

Such a consumer, Smyser said, "is reasonably expected to believe that a law firm is comprised of attorneys and that it does legal work."

In the context of a debt, Smyser said, the fact that a letter comes from an attorney has "a particular well-known and well-understood effect."

I'm getting calls for the same person on my phone! Sometimes a number shows up, other times it shows up as unknown. Been several years. I tell them to stop, and it works for maybe a few weeks. Used to be Sprint Collections.  Not sure who it is now