Harassing calls from a debt collector? Here is what you need to know

Does anyone know if it's legal for a collection company to block their caller ID or use an untraceable Google Voice phone number when calling you?

I'm afraid blanket answers, as usual, would be hazardous.

Names escape me now, but I remember a Fair Debt case from several years ago which claimed that generic blocked Caller ID from the defendant, such as "unknown caller" or "private" or "blocked name", was deceptive practice. The judge wasted no words in dismissing the claim, failing to see the problem with Caller ID which accurately reflects the moment. The caller blocked its number, Caller ID reported that fact, no one got hurt, end of story.

Now, if you want to paint dud CID as concealment which is greatly annoying and/or unfair -- and often that's true -- the secrecy needs to create harm in the surrounding facts of the case. In one of my cases I expressed the aggravation which resulted when a debt collection agency (DCA) persisted with frequent "unhelpful" Caller ID long after I had responded to the call campaign. Bad enough the DCA kept calling at times and places I'd set out of bounds, but it continued to play "Hide the ID" when I'd already written to acknowledge the calls and who at home was hearing the rings, removing the need for secrecy. I was peeved by the "business as usual" dialer pattern, which seemed calculated to find us off guard and answering to yet another scripted bully session, to have yet another tense discussion of paying an account which I had already disputed.

The improper timing was an easy winning claim. Their insistence on secrecy I might not have won. There is a parallel concern covered in §1692f(8) of the FDCPA -- enacted when telephones were all rotary dialed and unassisted by message recording or metadata displays -- which instructs collectors to take care that their mailing envelopes don't hint strongly that they think someone owes money. I think if tested, my opponents might argue that they were doing me a privacy favor with the lack of disclosure in Caller ID, needless or not.

Again while out of context, I'm unsure how far you'd get when making a claim based on some "untraceable" and probably disposable phone number. That kind of secrecy raises neck hairs and can indicate the worst sort of extortionists who wear a debt collection cloak to feign legitimacy. There are all manner of honest businesses which use "one way" numbers and don't expect or want responses to the same number. Redirection to some return "drop" number is not an issue, unless of course the company's stress on secrecy makes it too difficult or impossible to respond.

In other words, if DCA thugs use the phone as a blunt instrument of control and coercion, refusing inbounds and only talking when a person answers, and they won't provide a mailing address and they won't send letters, they light up multiple violations concerning fair treatment and required disclosure. I don't see that the clarity of phone number status matters so much as what the subscriber does with that number, perhaps to generate confusion or anxiety or fear.

I'll note here for comparison that the Telemarketing Sales Rule demands honesty in Caller ID from the sales and charity callers it covers. Their calls are required to display a phone number and it should be one which the business genuinely controls. Debt collectors have no burden to display any useful Caller ID. They can of course get dinged for generating misleading CID or outright spoofing.

I'm am over these people that can't hardly speak English, HURASSING ME!!!THEY ARE GETTING OUR CELL PHONE NUMBER FROM SOMEWHERE !! ITS NOT IN THE PHONE BOOK, SO  EITHER VERSION OR GOOGLE IS GIVING THEM OUT!!! HOW DO WE PUT A STOP TO IT ???!!!

Most likely you will need to get a new number. When you do, only tell it to family, close friends and necessary businesses like your bank. Tell your family and friends not to divulge it to anyone else. Also, make sure it is not posted to social media or any publicly accessible web site.

Yes, businesses like Verizon may sell phone numbers to "business partners" and it may leak out from them.

How do I stop repeated calls from scammers claiming to be with SSA or Fed. Tax Fraud agency. I've reported both to O.I.G.,changed my number and blocked every number they've used. These people are very threatening, to say the least.

would you please not call me any more

Would you please not reply with your eyes shut to ancient comments on the front page any more?

This thread concerns consumer debt collection, not various forms of government agency impostor fraud. Since your chances of finding and suing the call center are slim, your options are limited and will not stop them from trying.

Your Social Security number isn't suspended. Ever. - FTC, Sep 2018
Tax Scams/Consumer Alerts - IRS summary of various fake tax and impostor fraud

MIDLAND CREDIT MANAGEMENT who uses dozens and dozens of different phone numbers even though they are located (or so they say) in San Diego, California, and the phone calls come from all over the U.S.  They buy old, written off debts from various companies hoping to trick you into paying them.  Many people have stated that they have paid this debt with them but the calls continue to come. Leeches is what they are.  When you get a call, for pete's sake, don't answer it, let it go to voice mail. Then Google the phone number and a high percentage of the time you will find out where the call came from.  When you find nothing from Googling the number,, then it is a bogus, scam number.  If you can block the number. do so.  Inexpensive phone number blockers are sold on eBay.  Some hold up to 1,500 numbers.

Go to www.eBay.com and buy a phone call blocker.  Cheap and easy to use.  Some block up to 1,500 phone calls.  Once they call and are blocked, that is it, no more calls. Stopped.

Look at this one:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Pro-Incoming-Call-Te ... nQAAOSwDfxa6Xi3

and free shipping.

Let's return to page one and the premise of this thread. It discusses confrontation with debt collectors. It advises that we learn our FDCPA rights and use them. It specifically promotes the solving of our problems hands-on, like grownups. It doesn't say anything about plugging in a Chinese call blocker and hiding under a blanket until the calls stop. What will you tell your relatives, neighbors, employers, ex-lovers, former teachers, et al when the pursuer sprays them with a few dozen skip trace calls apiece? You're buying them all call blockers too?

Call blocking does not equal "no more calls, stopped". Otherwise we would name the action something other than a "block". The unwanted calls are still coming like stones hurled at the gate, because maintaining the barrage is almost cheaper than ceasing fire. Waiting around weeks and months for debt collector calls to pause and resume as they wish is not a strategy. Big-name junk debt collectors have no incentive to stop pestering you and everyone in your circle until you give them a reason which triggers a legal requirement.

Your punching bag of the week MCM is a highly visible domestic company with a street address. You I am sure can locate paper and ink. You combine those with USPS Certified labels to make the agency legally bound to obey your demands, whether that's to "put up or shut up" through validation or limit the means of contact or silence the noise entirely. The total cost remains much less than any call blocker on the market and you don't have to wait for a delivery truck to get started. Depending on how the collector reacts, your reward is either regained peace or a fat check paid to you for disobeying your notice. When was the last time your call blocker paid you damage awards?

Ignoring the issue is exactly the reaction MCM and other junk debt buyers want. Their plan is to sue anyone who looks easy to roll for a few grand. No other category of nuisance caller holds such a contractual power. Alleged debtors who leverage the FDCPA tend to choke off the autodialed calls and greatly reduce their chances of being sued and slapped with judgments. More critically, they preserve more of their own rights for the long term. You won't like this part, but a hunted person must answer and handle at least some of the calls to positively connect violations to their source. Otherwise one has only guesswork and hearsay for tools. People who ignore calls, delete messages, and trash letters will have no evidence of lawbreaking and thus no ammunition when the JDB sues and/or when named as Defendant.

Also, I am reasonably sure that the average 800Notes user has in fact learned something of Caller ID blocking methods. Comments referencing them and the act of blocking threaten to eclipse all others, contrary to the stated mission of this website. I think we have one or two forum threads where discussion of particular hardware and software is tolerated. Elsewhere product recommendations are treated like spam, regardless of intent.

I have been informed that I have a collection placed upon me. I have received several call over a period of 12 - 15 years from different collection agencies. How many agencies do I need to respond to when all are offering different settlement amounts for a bill I did not create and refuse to pay?

I'll need to make some assumptions about what you have left unclear. I read this to mean that several collectors in series have made a play for the same account, probably junk debt that's been passed around like a hackysack. The prior failure of one, three, or seven agencies to collect won't stop Schmuck Number 8 from trying again.

To best preserve your rights you respond to each initial dunning as it arrives, whether that response is "please validate", "quit calling my workplace", or "go jump in a lake". Sadly the transient commodity nature of junk debt means that the problem is truly never settled even when you "settle". These things have been made very cheap to pursue and easy to collect in court from the ninety-some percent of people who don't respond at all. For as long as we breathe the approach is "lather, rinse, repeat" when new chuckleheads are chasing ever-aging debts. If not for the possible burden of defending a collections lawsuit, the "zombies" could be safely ignored.

So that's the broad policy answer. The brass tacks fall on the actual age of your alleged debt, which unless it was already reduced to a judgment should be a stale claim in every state. It should be quite safe to write, on real paper, to the current debt collector a simple notice of refusal to pay. Many agencies forget what that triggers in the FDCPA. The correct responses are to drop the matter quietly or sue you. The latter option prompts you to rain down the hurt from your own FDCPA countersuit. The former option, when ignored, also gives you cause to sue them just for being ignorant jerks. As it is, your story says that the collection activity has no reasonable basis, which puts every collector on thin ice from the outset.

It's really amusing to be asked to "settle" something which you can easily get dismissed in court if you're illegally sued. There is growing (and disputed) case law saying that it's deceptive practice to even make the "settlement" offer on time-barred debts, one of the many circuit splits the CFPB is ready to address in proposed revisions of the FDCPA.

I would suggest contacting Lexington Law. They help with credit repair and getting things off of people's credit report. I was successful in getting a couple things removed and my credit score went from a 451 to 668 within a matter of several months. They have various rates depending on the type of service you need. They also will be the ones who will be sending all of the appropriate letters and track down the physical addresses to the debt collectors to properly serve them with the cease and desist letters needed.

Okay, one more time for everyone who missed it last month, the subject of the article leading this thread discusses confrontation with debt collectors. It does not discuss credit report revision or FCRA rights or anything like that beyond cautioning us that bad tradeline entry can be a form of retaliation for disputing a debt.

Now to the glory of Lexington Law, a service of such exalted reputation that for a dozen years or more their minions have spammed complaint sites like this one with all manner of glowing testimonials. Verily, they are truly heroes to the distressed consumers who were illegally pounced upon soon after being denied credit. This was not keen insight or magic but predatory marketing informed by snooping on credit report changes. Maybe to reinforce the old saw about leopards and their spots, Lex was sued five months ago by the CFPB for charging upfront fees and making false promises to win new customers.

This is of course to say that John Heath's operation is no different from the other credit fixer rackets which have come, gone, and rebranded. They promise the moon and send fees into orbit for services which an individual can perform FOR FREE and usually with greater competence. Any damned fool can goose a FICO score by pelting the credit reporting agencies with frivolous disputes. But soon the apology for an "investigation" via E-OSCAR ends and at best the score reverts to "normal". At worst, the credit report is left in a bigger mess than ever. Anyway, all that effort is too often hurled at the lesser problems which follow poor cash flow, like repainting a car door before its crushes and dents have been repaired.

Really if all there was to FDCPA enforcement was issuing "cease and desist letters", the CFPB's proposed rule changes wouldn't run on for half a mile like they do. I would be very worried about what's being sent in my name from a form letter paper mill like Lexie, and consider it quite hazardous to surrender control of the simplest things I can do to preserve my consumer rights.

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Files Suit Against Lexington Law, PGX Holdings, and Related Entities