Welcome to legal advice
Sunday, October 5, 2008
Should I Negotiate With a Collection Agency?
Unfortunately, I receive calls from clients who ask this question AFTER they have already begun negotiations with the collection agency. For the most part, as you might guess, I believe that the answer to this question is no.
We first have to take a look at what the collection agency is. There are generally two kinds of collection agencies: 1) Those that work as in-house collectors for a specific company or companies. Their goal is to recover the delinquent amounts due for their parent company; and 2) Those that purchase delinquent debt for the sole purpose of collecting funds for themselves at the highest rate possible.
Negotiation with a company that operates under foundation number 1 above may often be beneficial. It is very likely that the collection agency will have, or can get, all of the pertinent information that is necessary to prove a case against you in a court of law. In that scenario, negotiation may be beneficial as the case against you may be strong. Negotiation may truly be a way of saving yourself a decent amount of money.
Negotiation with a company that operates under foundation number 2 above is often a mistake. There are a number of reasons why I make that assertion so I will briefly explain a few of them.
The most important reason that I would not negotiate with one of those companies is that they very likely will not be able to prevail in a court of law against you unless you admit to all of their allegations. In my experience, I have found that the lawsuits filed by these agencies (among them are LVNV, Unifund, Palisades, Portfolio Recovery to name a few) are generally legally insufficient. They lack a number of required items, such as the signed contract, the monthly statements, the terms and conditions of the alleged account, and so on.
These lawsuits typically also fail to prove that the company actually has the right to sue you. While it is legal for a company to purchase an account and then file a lawsuit on that account, I have found that many of these agencies fail to include the documentation proving the sale of the account to them with the lawsuit. That failure makes the lawsuit fatally deficient, if you properly assert your rights thereunder.
The question that I pose to my clients is "why would you negotiate on a claim that is legally insufficient"? Obviously, every once in a while, these agencies do come up with all of the necessary information and do have a legally sufficient case against you. In that circumstance, I would submit that negotiation may be in the best interests of all concerned parties. Otherwise, my stance is to defend these claims to the fullest.
We first have to take a look at what the collection agency is. There are generally two kinds of collection agencies: 1) Those that work as in-house collectors for a specific company or companies. Their goal is to recover the delinquent amounts due for their parent company; and 2) Those that purchase delinquent debt for the sole purpose of collecting funds for themselves at the highest rate possible.
Negotiation with a company that operates under foundation number 1 above may often be beneficial. It is very likely that the collection agency will have, or can get, all of the pertinent information that is necessary to prove a case against you in a court of law. In that scenario, negotiation may be beneficial as the case against you may be strong. Negotiation may truly be a way of saving yourself a decent amount of money.
Negotiation with a company that operates under foundation number 2 above is often a mistake. There are a number of reasons why I make that assertion so I will briefly explain a few of them.
The most important reason that I would not negotiate with one of those companies is that they very likely will not be able to prevail in a court of law against you unless you admit to all of their allegations. In my experience, I have found that the lawsuits filed by these agencies (among them are LVNV, Unifund, Palisades, Portfolio Recovery to name a few) are generally legally insufficient. They lack a number of required items, such as the signed contract, the monthly statements, the terms and conditions of the alleged account, and so on.
These lawsuits typically also fail to prove that the company actually has the right to sue you. While it is legal for a company to purchase an account and then file a lawsuit on that account, I have found that many of these agencies fail to include the documentation proving the sale of the account to them with the lawsuit. That failure makes the lawsuit fatally deficient, if you properly assert your rights thereunder.
The question that I pose to my clients is "why would you negotiate on a claim that is legally insufficient"? Obviously, every once in a while, these agencies do come up with all of the necessary information and do have a legally sufficient case against you. In that circumstance, I would submit that negotiation may be in the best interests of all concerned parties. Otherwise, my stance is to defend these claims to the fullest.
Labels: Should I Negotiate With a Collection Agency
# posted by gopi @ 6:12 AM 
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]