8667890577

Here is some helpful information :

http://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/0149-debt-collection

"Can a debt collector contact anyone else about my debt?

If an attorney is representing you about the debt, the debt collector must contact the attorney, rather than you. If you don’t have an attorney, a collector may contact other people – but only to find out your address, your home phone number, and where you work. Collectors usually are prohibited from contacting third parties more than once. Other than to obtain this location information about you, a debt collector generally is not permitted to discuss your debt with anyone other than you, your spouse, or your attorney."

Report these bottom feeders ( cooper, hoffman, klein and associates/Anthony Freeman) to the FTC !

FROM THE FTC SITE :

Can a debt collector contact anyone else about my debt?

If an attorney is representing you about the debt, the debt collector must contact the attorney, rather than you. If you don’t have an attorney, a collector may contact other people – but only to find out your address, your home phone number, and where you work. Collectors usually are prohibited from contacting third parties more than once. Other than to obtain this location information about you, a debt collector generally is not permitted to discuss your debt with anyone other than you, your spouse, or your attorney.

You clearly have no idea how this works lady. You will be sued for harassment and fraud. I will be sure of it.

I received a call from (614)450-1476 and they advised to call 1-866-789-0577 once I called they threatened prosecution/wage garnishment. Being terrified of this I fell hook, line and sinker. I was very distraught over the situation crying (yes its silly to cry over a debt but I was thoroughly scared) they advised that I needed to purchase a pre-paid visa/mastercard to make payments within 24 hours or they would proceed with the suite. Thank god for my mother who said it didn't sound right and looked them up. Now I'm scared because they had all my info and not sure what to do from here.

You need to file a fraud report with the 3 credit bureaus.  Then read this and follow the links to learn more:
This is a common ploy by criminals attempting to extort money from people by scaring you into believing that you will be criminally charged, go to jail, lose your driver’s license, have wages garnished, be sued, and a variety of other variations on this,  all for an alleged or nonexistent debt.  They also use the “process server” who calls and claims he is going to serve you, but then says you could avoid it by calling another number.  Now why would a “process server” want to do you, a stranger, a favor, and at the same time not get paid to deliver the papers?

Federal law (FDCPA) requires them to send you a letter (US MAIL ONLY) within 5 days of their first contact that contains their name, physical address, the creditor’s name, and the amount of the alleged debt.  It also must contains “mini-Miranda” telling you that it is an attempt to collect a debt and that all information will be used for those purposes.  The one other important thing that this letter must also have in it is that you have a right to dispute the debt within 30 days of receipt of the letter and if you do so, all collection activity must be stopped until the debt is verified.
Read up on your rights here, get template letters to send and also make a complaint at this government site:  http://www.consumerfinance.gov/
Also file a complaint with your State Attorney General's office.
List of State AG’s offices:  http://consumerfraudreporting.org/stateattorneygenerallist.php

Also if they had your full SS#, go here to the IRS site and file the correct paperwork (possibly form 14039):  http://www.irs.gov/Individuals/How-Do-You-Rep ... aud-Activity%3F

I also am being threatened by these people calling themselves Cooper,Hoffman,Kleine,& Associates they had another name which was the Pete Rothstein Arbitration Firm why would they change their name something is not right I really think their scam artist.

Called that 866-789-0577 number.  Robo-greeter sounded familiar.  I'm thinking these people are located in New York state.  In any event total scam artists.  Ignore and block their calls.

Pay attention to BigA's notes.  Being in ordinary civil debt is not a crime and you cannot be arrested or prosecuted for it.  We do not have debtors prisons in the US.  These people rely on threats.  There is no lawsuit.  You can check this out yourself by going down to your local main courthouse and checking the civil lists by defendants name.

Report them:

http://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/0149-debt-collection  (Threatening criminal prosecution to collect a civil debt is a clear violation of the Federal Fair Debt Collection Act)

Also contact your local attorney general

If they continue to bother you, and you know you do not owe any money,  tell them that you know this is  a debt scam and that you are making a complaint to the police for extortion.  You might have to yell at the scammer and talk over him or her.  Once you get a copy of the police report and they call you again , just read out the  file number and the name of the PD or Sheriff’s office involved.   Tell them you’ll be glad to send a copy to them at whatever address the jack***es are working out of now.

they called my brother asking for me and saying the same things is this real??

i received a call from Ms Stein who stated to call her back at 866-789-0577 ext 305.  These people even called my mother and father lookimg for me.  When I called them the first time i spoke to a man who stated i wrote a $1000 bad check to a cash advance office in 2011.  I told him that i do not write checks and that we do not have cash advance offices in Arkansas.  He hung up after a couple minutes of going back and forth.  They called again and I spoke to Dorothy who then stated the check was for $2200 and that I needed to pay. I asked her what bank the check was on and she couldn't answer.  They stated they have me on video tape at the cash advance office. I began to laugh listening to this woman continue to make threats about having me served legal notifications and sending my case to their litigation department.  I told her to go ahead because I have absolutely no intention on paying them a dime.  She eventually hung up.  I am still waiting on the process server with the legal documents.

Yup, I've talked to the same Dorothy. She accused me of threatening her all because I wouldn't confirm my name or SSN. She said verbatim, "The decision has been made, you'll be receiving a summons!" So full of crap. These people have nothing better to do with their day than steal money from people, there's a special place for them.

I got 15 calls from this Cooper Huffman Cline dealing with a law suit last week. Yesterday and today I got 5 I have no clue who they are   how do I stop them.    It is a cell phone.

My (juvenile) daughter is receiving numerous calls and threatening voicemails on her phone from Anthony at Cooper, Hoffman, Klein.  He is looking for someone named "Lori" - we block the number but the calls continue from other phone numbers such as (866) 789-0577 and (916) 347-9473.  I can't locate any information that this company even exists.  I called "Anthony" directly to explain he had a wrong number and he hung up on me.

Texas Is Throwing People In Jail For Failing To Pay Back Predatory Loans

At least six people have been jailed in Texas over the past two years for owing money on payday loans, according to a damning new analysis of public court records.
The economic advocacy group Texas Appleseed found that more than 1,500 debtors have been hit with criminal charges in the state -- even though Texas enacted a law in 2012 explicitly prohibiting lenders from using criminal charges to collect debts.
According to Appleseed's review, 1,576 criminal complaints were issued against debtors in eight Texas counties between 2012 and 2014. These complaints were often filed by courts with minimal review and based solely on the payday lender's word and frequently flimsy evidence. As a result, borrowers have been forced to repay at least $166,000, the group found.
Appleseed included this analysis in a Dec. 17 letter sent to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the Texas attorney general's office and several other government entities.
It wasn't supposed to be this way. Using criminal courts as debt collection agencies is against federal law, the Texas constitution and the state’s penal code. To clarify the state law, in 2012 the Texas legislature passed legislation that explicitly describes the circumstances under which lenders are prohibited from pursuing criminal charges against borrowers.
It’s quite simple: In Texas, failure to repay a loan is a civil, not a criminal, matter. Payday lenders cannot pursue criminal charges against borrowers unless fraud or another crime is clearly established.
In 2013, a devastating Texas Observer investigation documented widespread use of criminal charges against borrowers before the clarification to state law was passed.

Nevertheless, Texas Appleseed's new analysis shows that payday lenders continue to routinely press dubious criminal charges against borrowers.
Ms. Jones, a 71-year-old who asked that her first name not be published in order to protect her privacy, was one of those 1,576 cases. (The Huffington Post reviewed and confirmed the court records associated with her case.) On March 3, 2012, Jones borrowed $250 from an Austin franchise of Cash Plus, a payday lender, after losing her job as a receptionist.
Four months later, she owed almost $1,000 and faced the possibility of jail time if she didn’t pay up.
The issue for Ms. Jones -- and most other payday borrowers who face criminal charges -- came down to a check. It’s standard practice at payday lenders for borrowers to leave either a check or a bank account number to obtain a loan. These checks and debit authorizations are the backbone of the payday lending system. They’re also the backbone of most criminal charges against payday borrowers.
Ms. Jones initially obtained her loan by writing Cash Plus a check for $271.91 -- the full amount of the loan plus interest and fees -- with the understanding that the check was not to be cashed unless she failed to make her payments. The next month, when the loan came due, Jones didn’t have the money to pay in full. She made a partial payment, rolling over the loan for another month and asking if she could create a payment plan to pay back the remainder. But Jones told HuffPost that CashPlus rejected her request and instead deposited her initial check.
Jones' check to Cash Plus was returned with a notice that her bank account had been closed. She was then criminally charged with bad check writing. Thanks to county fines, Jones now owed $918.91 -- just four months after she had borrowed $250.
In Texas, bad check writing and "theft by check" are Class B misdemeanors, punishable by up to 180 days in jail as well as potential fines and additional consequences. In the typical "hot check" case, a person writes a check that they know will bounce in order to buy something.
But Texas law is clear that checks written to secure a payday loan, like Jones’, are not "hot checks." If the lender cashes the check when the loan is due and it bounces, the assumption isn’t that the borrower stole money by writing a hot check –- it’s just that they can’t repay their loan.
That doesn’t mean that loan transactions are exempt from Texas criminal law. However, the intent of the 2012 clarification to state law is that a bounced check written to a payday lender alone cannot justify criminal charges.
Yet in Texas, criminal charges are frequently substantiated by little more than the lender's word and evidence that is often inadequate. For instance, the criminal complaint against Jones simply includes a photocopy of her bounced check.
Making matters worse, Texas Justice of the Peace courts, which handle claims under $10,000, appear to be rubber-stamping bad check affidavits as they receive them and indiscriminately filing criminal charges. Once the charges are filed, the borrower must enter a plea or face an arrest warrant. If the borrower pleads guilty, they must pay a fine on top of the amount owed to the lender.
Jones moved after she borrowing from Cash Plus, so she did not get notice of the charges by mail. Instead, a county constable showed up at her new address. Jones said she was terrified and embarrassed by the charges. She had to enter a plea in the case or else face an arrest warrant and possible jail time. In addition to the fines, Jones was unable to renew her driver's license until the case was resolved.
Craig Wells, the president and CEO of Cash Plus, which is based in California but has about 100 franchises in 13 states, told HuffPost that “this was the first I’ve heard of this case.” He said that the company instructs its franchises to adhere to all state laws and regulations. On the company’s website, Wells says his goal is for Cash Plus to be “as-close-to-perfect-a-business-as-one-can-get," adding that the company’s “top-notch customer experience keeps them coming back over and over again. ”
Emilio Herrera, the Cash Plus franchisee who submitted the affidavit against Jones, told HuffPost that he does not remember her case. But he added that he tries to work out payment plans with all his customers, and that it is common for his customers to pay back loans in very small increments.
In response to a request for comment from HuffPost about Appleseed's letter, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau spokesman Sam Gilford said, "Consumers should not be subjected to illegal threats when they are struggling to pay their bills, and lenders should not expect to break the law without consequences."
One reason that lenders' predatory behavior continues is simple administrative overload. Travis County Justice of the Peace Susan Steeg, who approved the charges against Jones, told HuffPost that due to the volume of bad check affidavits her court receives, her office has been instructed by the county attorney to file charges as affidavits are submitted. The charges are then passed along to the county attorney's office. It is up to the county attorney to review the cases and decide whether to prosecute or dismiss them.
But Travis County Attorney David Escamilla told HuffPost that his office had never instructed the Justice of the Peace courts to approve all bad check complaints, and said he did not know why or where Steeg would have gotten that understanding. “We don’t do it,” Escamilla said, referring to the usage of the criminal hot checks process to enforce the terms of lending agreements.
When cases are wrongfully filed by payday lenders, how quickly they are dismissed depends on prosecutors' workload and judgment. Often, it is not clear that theft by check cases are payday loans, since the name of the payday lender is not immediately distinguishable from that of an ordinary merchant.
District attorneys may also receive these complaints and have the ability to file criminal charges. According to Ann Baddour, a policy analyst at Appleseed, the DAs seem to operate with more discretion than the county attorneys, but the outcomes were arguably as perverse. Baddour said one DA told her that of the hot check complaints he had received, none had led to criminal charges or prosecutions. Instead, he said, his office sent letters threatening criminal charges unless the initial loan amounts plus fees were repaid.
The DA, who seemed to think he was showing evidence of his proper conduct, was instead admitting that his office functioned as a debt collector.
With the help of free legal aid, Jones’ case was eventually dismissed, and she said the court waived her outstanding payment to Cash Plus. But not all debtors are as fortunate.
Despite being against state law, the data show that criminal complaints are an effective way for payday lenders to get borrowers to pay. Of the 1,576 criminal complaints Appleseed analyzed, 385 resulted in the borrower making a repayment on their loan. In Collin County alone, 204 of the 700 criminal complaints based on payday lenders’ affidavits ended in payments totaling $131,836.
This success in using criminal charges to coerce money from borrowers means that payday lenders have a financial incentive to file criminal charges against debtors with alarming regularity -- even if those charges are eventually rightfully dismissed.
Because Appleseed’s study only covered eight of Texas’ 254 counties, there are likely more cases statewide. And Texas is not alone. In 2011, The Wall Street Journal found that more than a third of states allow borrowers to be jailed, even though federal law mandates that loan repayment be treated as a civil issue rather than a criminal one.
“There’s a lot more to learn about the practice itself, how widely it’s used, and its effect on consumers,” Mary Spector, a law professor at Southern Methodist University who specializes in debt collection issues, told HuffPost. “I think they’ve uncovered the tip of the iceberg.”

Texas Is Throwing People In Jail For Failing To Pay Back Predatory Loans

At least six people have been jailed in Texas over the past two years for owing money on payday loans, according to a damning new analysis of public court records.
The economic advocacy group Texas Appleseed found that more than 1,500 debtors have been hit with criminal charges in the state -- even though Texas enacted a law in 2012 explicitly prohibiting lenders from using criminal charges to collect debts.
According to Appleseed's review, 1,576 criminal complaints were issued against debtors in eight Texas counties between 2012 and 2014. These complaints were often filed by courts with minimal review and based solely on the payday lender's word and frequently flimsy evidence. As a result, borrowers have been forced to repay at least $166,000, the group found.
Appleseed included this analysis in a Dec. 17 letter sent to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the Texas attorney general's office and several other government entities.
It wasn't supposed to be this way. Using criminal courts as debt collection agencies is against federal law, the Texas constitution and the state’s penal code. To clarify the state law, in 2012 the Texas legislature passed legislation that explicitly describes the circumstances under which lenders are prohibited from pursuing criminal charges against borrowers.
It’s quite simple: In Texas, failure to repay a loan is a civil, not a criminal, matter. Payday lenders cannot pursue criminal charges against borrowers unless fraud or another crime is clearly established.
In 2013, a devastating Texas Observer investigation documented widespread use of criminal charges against borrowers before the clarification to state law was passed.

Nevertheless, Texas Appleseed's new analysis shows that payday lenders continue to routinely press dubious criminal charges against borrowers.
Ms. Jones, a 71-year-old who asked that her first name not be published in order to protect her privacy, was one of those 1,576 cases. (The Huffington Post reviewed and confirmed the court records associated with her case.) On March 3, 2012, Jones borrowed $250 from an Austin franchise of Cash Plus, a payday lender, after losing her job as a receptionist.
Four months later, she owed almost $1,000 and faced the possibility of jail time if she didn’t pay up.
The issue for Ms. Jones -- and most other payday borrowers who face criminal charges -- came down to a check. It’s standard practice at payday lenders for borrowers to leave either a check or a bank account number to obtain a loan. These checks and debit authorizations are the backbone of the payday lending system. They’re also the backbone of most criminal charges against payday borrowers.
Ms. Jones initially obtained her loan by writing Cash Plus a check for $271.91 -- the full amount of the loan plus interest and fees -- with the understanding that the check was not to be cashed unless she failed to make her payments. The next month, when the loan came due, Jones didn’t have the money to pay in full. She made a partial payment, rolling over the loan for another month and asking if she could create a payment plan to pay back the remainder. But Jones told HuffPost that CashPlus rejected her request and instead deposited her initial check.
Jones' check to Cash Plus was returned with a notice that her bank account had been closed. She was then criminally charged with bad check writing. Thanks to county fines, Jones now owed $918.91 -- just four months after she had borrowed $250.
In Texas, bad check writing and "theft by check" are Class B misdemeanors, punishable by up to 180 days in jail as well as potential fines and additional consequences. In the typical "hot check" case, a person writes a check that they know will bounce in order to buy something.
But Texas law is clear that checks written to secure a payday loan, like Jones’, are not "hot checks." If the lender cashes the check when the loan is due and it bounces, the assumption isn’t that the borrower stole money by writing a hot check –- it’s just that they can’t repay their loan.
That doesn’t mean that loan transactions are exempt from Texas criminal law. However, the intent of the 2012 clarification to state law is that a bounced check written to a payday lender alone cannot justify criminal charges.
Yet in Texas, criminal charges are frequently substantiated by little more than the lender's word and evidence that is often inadequate. For instance, the criminal complaint against Jones simply includes a photocopy of her bounced check.
Making matters worse, Texas Justice of the Peace courts, which handle claims under $10,000, appear to be rubber-stamping bad check affidavits as they receive them and indiscriminately filing criminal charges. Once the charges are filed, the borrower must enter a plea or face an arrest warrant. If the borrower pleads guilty, they must pay a fine on top of the amount owed to the lender.
Jones moved after she borrowing from Cash Plus, so she did not get notice of the charges by mail. Instead, a county constable showed up at her new address. Jones said she was terrified and embarrassed by the charges. She had to enter a plea in the case or else face an arrest warrant and possible jail time. In addition to the fines, Jones was unable to renew her driver's license until the case was resolved.
Craig Wells, the president and CEO of Cash Plus, which is based in California but has about 100 franchises in 13 states, told HuffPost that “this was the first I’ve heard of this case.” He said that the company instructs its franchises to adhere to all state laws and regulations. On the company’s website, Wells says his goal is for Cash Plus to be “as-close-to-perfect-a-business-as-one-can-get," adding that the company’s “top-notch customer experience keeps them coming back over and over again. ”
Emilio Herrera, the Cash Plus franchisee who submitted the affidavit against Jones, told HuffPost that he does not remember her case. But he added that he tries to work out payment plans with all his customers, and that it is common for his customers to pay back loans in very small increments.
In response to a request for comment from HuffPost about Appleseed's letter, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau spokesman Sam Gilford said, "Consumers should not be subjected to illegal threats when they are struggling to pay their bills, and lenders should not expect to break the law without consequences."
One reason that lenders' predatory behavior continues is simple administrative overload. Travis County Justice of the Peace Susan Steeg, who approved the charges against Jones, told HuffPost that due to the volume of bad check affidavits her court receives, her office has been instructed by the county attorney to file charges as affidavits are submitted. The charges are then passed along to the county attorney's office. It is up to the county attorney to review the cases and decide whether to prosecute or dismiss them.
But Travis County Attorney David Escamilla told HuffPost that his office had never instructed the Justice of the Peace courts to approve all bad check complaints, and said he did not know why or where Steeg would have gotten that understanding. “We don’t do it,” Escamilla said, referring to the usage of the criminal hot checks process to enforce the terms of lending agreements.
When cases are wrongfully filed by payday lenders, how quickly they are dismissed depends on prosecutors' workload and judgment. Often, it is not clear that theft by check cases are payday loans, since the name of the payday lender is not immediately distinguishable from that of an ordinary merchant.
District attorneys may also receive these complaints and have the ability to file criminal charges. According to Ann Baddour, a policy analyst at Appleseed, the DAs seem to operate with more discretion than the county attorneys, but the outcomes were arguably as perverse. Baddour said one DA told her that of the hot check complaints he had received, none had led to criminal charges or prosecutions. Instead, he said, his office sent letters threatening criminal charges unless the initial loan amounts plus fees were repaid.
The DA, who seemed to think he was showing evidence of his proper conduct, was instead admitting that his office functioned as a debt collector.
With the help of free legal aid, Jones’ case was eventually dismissed, and she said the court waived her outstanding payment to Cash Plus. But not all debtors are as fortunate.
Despite being against state law, the data show that criminal complaints are an effective way for payday lenders to get borrowers to pay. Of the 1,576 criminal complaints Appleseed analyzed, 385 resulted in the borrower making a repayment on their loan. In Collin County alone, 204 of the 700 criminal complaints based on payday lenders’ affidavits ended in payments totaling $131,836.
This success in using criminal charges to coerce money from borrowers means that payday lenders have a financial incentive to file criminal charges against debtors with alarming regularity -- even if those charges are eventually rightfully dismissed.
Because Appleseed’s study only covered eight of Texas’ 254 counties, there are likely more cases statewide. And Texas is not alone. In 2011, The Wall Street Journal found that more than a third of states allow borrowers to be jailed, even though federal law mandates that loan repayment be treated as a civil issue rather than a criminal one.
“There’s a lot more to learn about the practice itself, how widely it’s used, and its effect on consumers,” Mary Spector, a law professor at Southern Methodist University who specializes in debt collection issues, told HuffPost. “I think they’ve uncovered the tip of the iceberg.”

Texas Is Throwing People In Jail For Failing To Pay Back Predatory Loans

At least six people have been jailed in Texas over the past two years for owing money on payday loans, according to a damning new analysis of public court records.
The economic advocacy group Texas Appleseed found that more than 1,500 debtors have been hit with criminal charges in the state -- even though Texas enacted a law in 2012 explicitly prohibiting lenders from using criminal charges to collect debts.
According to Appleseed's review, 1,576 criminal complaints were issued against debtors in eight Texas counties between 2012 and 2014. These complaints were often filed by courts with minimal review and based solely on the payday lender's word and frequently flimsy evidence. As a result, borrowers have been forced to repay at least $166,000, the group found.
Appleseed included this analysis in a Dec. 17 letter sent to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the Texas attorney general's office and several other government entities.
It wasn't supposed to be this way. Using criminal courts as debt collection agencies is against federal law, the Texas constitution and the state’s penal code. To clarify the state law, in 2012 the Texas legislature passed legislation that explicitly describes the circumstances under which lenders are prohibited from pursuing criminal charges against borrowers.
It’s quite simple: In Texas, failure to repay a loan is a civil, not a criminal, matter. Payday lenders cannot pursue criminal charges against borrowers unless fraud or another crime is clearly established.
In 2013, a devastating Texas Observer investigation documented widespread use of criminal charges against borrowers before the clarification to state law was passed.

Nevertheless, Texas Appleseed's new analysis shows that payday lenders continue to routinely press dubious criminal charges against borrowers.
Ms. Jones, a 71-year-old who asked that her first name not be published in order to protect her privacy, was one of those 1,576 cases. (The Huffington Post reviewed and confirmed the court records associated with her case.) On March 3, 2012, Jones borrowed $250 from an Austin franchise of Cash Plus, a payday lender, after losing her job as a receptionist.
Four months later, she owed almost $1,000 and faced the possibility of jail time if she didn’t pay up.
The issue for Ms. Jones -- and most other payday borrowers who face criminal charges -- came down to a check. It’s standard practice at payday lenders for borrowers to leave either a check or a bank account number to obtain a loan. These checks and debit authorizations are the backbone of the payday lending system. They’re also the backbone of most criminal charges against payday borrowers.
Ms. Jones initially obtained her loan by writing Cash Plus a check for $271.91 -- the full amount of the loan plus interest and fees -- with the understanding that the check was not to be cashed unless she failed to make her payments. The next month, when the loan came due, Jones didn’t have the money to pay in full. She made a partial payment, rolling over the loan for another month and asking if she could create a payment plan to pay back the remainder. But Jones told HuffPost that CashPlus rejected her request and instead deposited her initial check.
Jones' check to Cash Plus was returned with a notice that her bank account had been closed. She was then criminally charged with bad check writing. Thanks to county fines, Jones now owed $918.91 -- just four months after she had borrowed $250.
In Texas, bad check writing and "theft by check" are Class B misdemeanors, punishable by up to 180 days in jail as well as potential fines and additional consequences. In the typical "hot check" case, a person writes a check that they know will bounce in order to buy something.
But Texas law is clear that checks written to secure a payday loan, like Jones’, are not "hot checks." If the lender cashes the check when the loan is due and it bounces, the assumption isn’t that the borrower stole money by writing a hot check –- it’s just that they can’t repay their loan.
That doesn’t mean that loan transactions are exempt from Texas criminal law. However, the intent of the 2012 clarification to state law is that a bounced check written to a payday lender alone cannot justify criminal charges.
Yet in Texas, criminal charges are frequently substantiated by little more than the lender's word and evidence that is often inadequate. For instance, the criminal complaint against Jones simply includes a photocopy of her bounced check.
Making matters worse, Texas Justice of the Peace courts, which handle claims under $10,000, appear to be rubber-stamping bad check affidavits as they receive them and indiscriminately filing criminal charges. Once the charges are filed, the borrower must enter a plea or face an arrest warrant. If the borrower pleads guilty, they must pay a fine on top of the amount owed to the lender.
Jones moved after she borrowing from Cash Plus, so she did not get notice of the charges by mail. Instead, a county constable showed up at her new address. Jones said she was terrified and embarrassed by the charges. She had to enter a plea in the case or else face an arrest warrant and possible jail time. In addition to the fines, Jones was unable to renew her driver's license until the case was resolved.
Craig Wells, the president and CEO of Cash Plus, which is based in California but has about 100 franchises in 13 states, told HuffPost that “this was the first I’ve heard of this case.” He said that the company instructs its franchises to adhere to all state laws and regulations. On the company’s website, Wells says his goal is for Cash Plus to be “as-close-to-perfect-a-business-as-one-can-get," adding that the company’s “top-notch customer experience keeps them coming back over and over again. ”
Emilio Herrera, the Cash Plus franchisee who submitted the affidavit against Jones, told HuffPost that he does not remember her case. But he added that he tries to work out payment plans with all his customers, and that it is common for his customers to pay back loans in very small increments.
In response to a request for comment from HuffPost about Appleseed's letter, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau spokesman Sam Gilford said, "Consumers should not be subjected to illegal threats when they are struggling to pay their bills, and lenders should not expect to break the law without consequences."
One reason that lenders' predatory behavior continues is simple administrative overload. Travis County Justice of the Peace Susan Steeg, who approved the charges against Jones, told HuffPost that due to the volume of bad check affidavits her court receives, her office has been instructed by the county attorney to file charges as affidavits are submitted. The charges are then passed along to the county attorney's office. It is up to the county attorney to review the cases and decide whether to prosecute or dismiss them.
But Travis County Attorney David Escamilla told HuffPost that his office had never instructed the Justice of the Peace courts to approve all bad check complaints, and said he did not know why or where Steeg would have gotten that understanding. “We don’t do it,” Escamilla said, referring to the usage of the criminal hot checks process to enforce the terms of lending agreements.
When cases are wrongfully filed by payday lenders, how quickly they are dismissed depends on prosecutors' workload and judgment. Often, it is not clear that theft by check cases are payday loans, since the name of the payday lender is not immediately distinguishable from that of an ordinary merchant.
District attorneys may also receive these complaints and have the ability to file criminal charges. According to Ann Baddour, a policy analyst at Appleseed, the DAs seem to operate with more discretion than the county attorneys, but the outcomes were arguably as perverse. Baddour said one DA told her that of the hot check complaints he had received, none had led to criminal charges or prosecutions. Instead, he said, his office sent letters threatening criminal charges unless the initial loan amounts plus fees were repaid.
The DA, who seemed to think he was showing evidence of his proper conduct, was instead admitting that his office functioned as a debt collector.
With the help of free legal aid, Jones’ case was eventually dismissed, and she said the court waived her outstanding payment to Cash Plus. But not all debtors are as fortunate.
Despite being against state law, the data show that criminal complaints are an effective way for payday lenders to get borrowers to pay. Of the 1,576 criminal complaints Appleseed analyzed, 385 resulted in the borrower making a repayment on their loan. In Collin County alone, 204 of the 700 criminal complaints based on payday lenders’ affidavits ended in payments totaling $131,836.
This success in using criminal charges to coerce money from borrowers means that payday lenders have a financial incentive to file criminal charges against debtors with alarming regularity -- even if those charges are eventually rightfully dismissed.
Because Appleseed’s study only covered eight of Texas’ 254 counties, there are likely more cases statewide. And Texas is not alone. In 2011, The Wall Street Journal found that more than a third of states allow borrowers to be jailed, even though federal law mandates that loan repayment be treated as a civil issue rather than a criminal one.
“There’s a lot more to learn about the practice itself, how widely it’s used, and its effect on consumers,” Mary Spector, a law professor at Southern Methodist University who specializes in debt collection issues, told HuffPost. “I think they’ve uncovered the tip of the iceberg.”

Report them:

http://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/0149-debt-collection  (Threatening criminal prosecution to collect a civil debt is a clear violation of the Federal Fair Debt Collection Act)

Also contact your local attorney general

If they continue to bother you, and you know you do not owe any money,  tell them that you know this is  a debt scam and that you are making a complaint to the police for extortion.  You might have to yell at the scammer and talk over him or her.  Once you get a copy of the police report and they call you again , just read out the  file number and the name of the PD or Sheriff’s office involved.   Tell them you’ll be glad to send a copy to them at whatever address the jack***es are working out of now.

Pay attention to BigA.  Being in debt is not a crime and you cannot be arrested or prosecuted for it.  We do not have debtors prisons in the US.  Debt collectors have no influence on the criminal justice system in any case.   Only a judge can issue an order of garnishments and that is only as part of a court process where all parties are given a chance to make their case.  Many states strictly control garnishments and some states do not allow them at all.  Go back to your bank and see if the transactions can be reversed for fraud.  Also try to find out who, exactly you paid the funds to and tell us.  That way it might be possible to find these people.

Just because a voice on the telephone claims you owe a debt does not mean you owe it
If a voice on the telephone claims you owe a debt:

1.    Demand the person give you his or her name, company name, and address
2.     Demand a debt validation letter by US mail.  E-mail no good.
3.    Do not pay  the collection agent or anyone else a  DIME  until the debt is validated.

Of course they won’t do this, no scammer ever will, so simply block their calls and ignore them.

If they are bothering you,

Report them:

http://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/0149-debt-collection  (Threatening criminal prosecution to collect a civil debt is a clear violation of the Federal Fair Debt Collection Act)

Also contact your local attorney general

If they continue to bother you, and you know you do not owe any money,  tell them that you know this is  a debt scam and that you are making a complaint to the police for extortion.  You might have to yell at the scammer and talk over him or her.  Once you get a copy of the police report and they call you again , just read out the  file number and the name of the PD or Sheriff’s office involved.   Tell them you’ll be glad to send a copy to them at whatever address the jack***es are working out of now.

Juno it's a scam and A. You either work for cooper. Hoffman, kline and associates or B work for companies similar to them.

This Cooper, Hoffman, Klein & Associates is the same as ADR, Whcih is the same as Adams Davis and Rothstein. .  As well as  National Credit Processing Inc. ( http://www.national-credit-processing.org/)  [Webpage down].  They all lead back to NCW Billing.  800notes links them all up if you google them via the 800notes Index page.

This group:

NCW Billing, Inc  AKA National Credit Works, Inc.
P.O. Box 844
Amherst, NY 14226

NCW BILLING INC.  AKA  ADR Arbitration  & Alliant Capital  Management  & Morgan Harris LLC & Enhanced Acquisitions  LLC & God knows how many other debt scamming operations  located at the same address.

NYS Department of State
Division of Corporations
Entity Information
The information contained in this database is current through January 9, 2015.

Selected Entity Name: NCW BILLING INC.
Selected Entity Status Information
Current Entity Name:    NCW BILLING INC.
DOS ID #:    4186382
Initial DOS Filing Date:    JANUARY 10, 2012
County:    ERIE
Jurisdiction:    NEW YORK
Entity Type:    DOMESTIC BUSINESS CORPORATION
Current Entity Status:    ACTIVE

Selected Entity Address Information
DOS Process (Address to which DOS will mail process if accepted on behalf of the entity)
NCW BILLING INC.
1098 BOWEN DRIVE EAST
NORTH TONAWANDA, NEW YORK, 14120
Registered Agent
NONE
___________________________________________

THIS BUSINESS IS NOT BBB ACCREDITED
NCW Billing Inc.

3840 E Robinson Rd Ste 353, Amherst, NY 14228
http://www.ncwbilling.com
! THERE IS AN ALERT ON NCW BILLING INC. !

BBB has seen a major increase in collection agencies
setting up businesses in the Upstate New York area over the past several
years.  In an effort to keep consumers informed about which collection
agencies are operating in accordance with Federal Law,
we are asking for specific information from all
collection agencies operating in our service area.  The requests includes
the following:

:Federal Employee Identification Number-EIN

:Proof Of Licensing, bonding and or registration by the
city, town in which your business is located.

:Proof of licensing required by any state in which you
operate by mail or telephone or email.

This collection agency has not responded to our
requests.

BBB advises consumers to be aware of their legal rights
in regard to collections.  The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act is a
statue enacted in 1978 which seeks to eliminate abusive and harassing behavior
by any debt or collection agency.  The act states specific practices and
rules under which debt collectors must abide by.  There are penalties for
agencies found breaking these laws.  Some of these laws state that a
collection agency is forbidden to harass a debtor, which includes threatening
violence or legal action.  They may not use crude or offensive language or
identify themselves as anyone other than by their business name.  If a
consumer believes a debt or collection agency has violated any of the FDCPA
laws the BBB encourages them to file complaints with the BBB at bbb.org and Federal Trade Commission at ftc.gov.

BBB® F Rating
On a scale of A+ to F