No recourse for harassing calls?
April 2, 2008 10:39 AM Subscribe
We been getting calls from debt collectors for months now for someone we've never heard of. Is there some reason why telcos will not let consumers block 1-800 numbers? Are they in bed with telemarketers and bill collectors?
I work nights, and am having problems with a bill collector (IC Systems) calling for someone I never heard of who owes eBay money. We cannot get them to stop calling; they basically try to get info about the debtor from us then hang up on us.
I called my phone company (Embarq) and they said there's nothing they can do. I have their selective call rejection service and it does -not- let you put in 800/888 numbers! I recall we had this problem several years ago when we were with SBC, too.
I'm really intrigued if there's some reason why the telcos cannot or will not block toll free numbers. This sounds really sketchy.
Is it time to dump the telcos and go to VOIP for our needs?
BTW I looked up FDCPA regulations and it looks like it only provides protections between the bill collector and the debtor, not us... and from a little Google searching it appears the Do Not Call List (which we're on) does not apply to debt collectors.
I work nights, and am having problems with a bill collector (IC Systems) calling for someone I never heard of who owes eBay money. We cannot get them to stop calling; they basically try to get info about the debtor from us then hang up on us.
I called my phone company (Embarq) and they said there's nothing they can do. I have their selective call rejection service and it does -not- let you put in 800/888 numbers! I recall we had this problem several years ago when we were with SBC, too.
I'm really intrigued if there's some reason why the telcos cannot or will not block toll free numbers. This sounds really sketchy.
Is it time to dump the telcos and go to VOIP for our needs?
BTW I looked up FDCPA regulations and it looks like it only provides protections between the bill collector and the debtor, not us... and from a little Google searching it appears the Do Not Call List (which we're on) does not apply to debt collectors.
Check this previous question. Basically, the company is breaking the law when it continues to call you about someone else's debt, and there is a standard way to get them to stop.
posted by burnmp3s at 11:04 AM on April 2, 2008 [1 favorite]
posted by burnmp3s at 11:04 AM on April 2, 2008 [1 favorite]
Burnmp3s' link + this example letter should help you. I do enjoy VOIP for annoyances like this, though. My VOIP provider allows me to send specific numbers to a fake busy or fake disconnected signal.
posted by sharkfu at 11:12 AM on April 2, 2008
posted by sharkfu at 11:12 AM on April 2, 2008
Yep, I highly recommend VOIP for this. Mine lets me block specific numbers, specific area codes (800/866/877/888), or area codes with exchanges.
posted by kindall at 11:24 AM on April 2, 2008
posted by kindall at 11:24 AM on April 2, 2008
Response by poster: The problem with some of the solutions above is that it suggests that the debt collector has a relationship with me. They don't. They only have a relationship with my phone number. Why on earth would I seek validation of a debt on behalf of some deadbeat who does owe the debt and is using my number?
posted by crapmatic at 11:26 AM on April 2, 2008
posted by crapmatic at 11:26 AM on April 2, 2008
If you inform them that this is not your debt, it is illegal for them to keep calling you. Informing them in writing makes it provable that you informed them.
posted by winston at 11:29 AM on April 2, 2008
posted by winston at 11:29 AM on April 2, 2008
Why on earth would I seek validation of a debt on behalf of some deadbeat who does owe the debt and is using my number?
That's definitely not what anyone is suggesting here. The point of writing them is to dispute that they have any right to call you to collect a debt. You are basically saying "I beleive that by calling me you are in violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Either prove you have the right to collect a debt from me (as you are required to do by law) or stop calling me."
YMMV but it seems that in general when you bring up the FDCPA and threaten legal action the debt collectors generally remove your number from their systems.
posted by burnmp3s at 11:45 AM on April 2, 2008
That's definitely not what anyone is suggesting here. The point of writing them is to dispute that they have any right to call you to collect a debt. You are basically saying "I beleive that by calling me you are in violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Either prove you have the right to collect a debt from me (as you are required to do by law) or stop calling me."
YMMV but it seems that in general when you bring up the FDCPA and threaten legal action the debt collectors generally remove your number from their systems.
posted by burnmp3s at 11:45 AM on April 2, 2008
The problem with some of the solutions above is that it suggests that the debt collector has a relationship with me. They don't. They only have a relationship with my phone number. Why on earth would I seek validation of a debt on behalf of some deadbeat who does owe the debt and is using my number?
I didn't get the impression anyone here thinks that, but the blockheads at the collection agency will assume the worst, and act as if you are lying on behalf of the debtor until you get someone else (see burnmp3s and sharkfu) to force them to lay off.
You might want to do a free credit report check on yourself to make sure that the big 3 credit agencies -- who also try their best to make connections between people and debt based on sometimes rather thin evidence -- haven't somehow linked you up to the delinquent debtor as well.
posted by aught at 12:39 PM on April 2, 2008
I didn't get the impression anyone here thinks that, but the blockheads at the collection agency will assume the worst, and act as if you are lying on behalf of the debtor until you get someone else (see burnmp3s and sharkfu) to force them to lay off.
You might want to do a free credit report check on yourself to make sure that the big 3 credit agencies -- who also try their best to make connections between people and debt based on sometimes rather thin evidence -- haven't somehow linked you up to the delinquent debtor as well.
posted by aught at 12:39 PM on April 2, 2008
They're still breaking FDCPA in calling you trying to get location information.
http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/consumer/credit/cre27.pdf
§ 804. Acquisition of location information
Any debt collector communicating with any person other
than the consumer for the purpose of acquiring location information
about the consumer shall—
(1) identify himself, state that he is confirming or correcting
location information concerning the consumer, and,
only if expressly requested, identify his employer;
(2) not state that such consumer owes any debt;
(3) not communicate with any such person more than once
unless requested to do so by such person or unless
the debt collector reasonably believes that the earlier
response of such person is erroneous or incomplete and
that such person now has correct or complete location
information;
If they contact you further, tell them that it is not convenient for you to receive calls and they must conduct all future contact in writing. If they believe you are the debtor then they must do so.
It may be necessary for you to request this stopping of contact in writing, but some sleep seems well worth $0.42.
posted by phearlez at 1:18 PM on April 2, 2008
http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/consumer/credit/cre27.pdf
§ 804. Acquisition of location information
Any debt collector communicating with any person other
than the consumer for the purpose of acquiring location information
about the consumer shall—
(1) identify himself, state that he is confirming or correcting
location information concerning the consumer, and,
only if expressly requested, identify his employer;
(2) not state that such consumer owes any debt;
(3) not communicate with any such person more than once
unless requested to do so by such person or unless
the debt collector reasonably believes that the earlier
response of such person is erroneous or incomplete and
that such person now has correct or complete location
information;
If they contact you further, tell them that it is not convenient for you to receive calls and they must conduct all future contact in writing. If they believe you are the debtor then they must do so.
It may be necessary for you to request this stopping of contact in writing, but some sleep seems well worth $0.42.
posted by phearlez at 1:18 PM on April 2, 2008
Is there some reason why telcos will not let consumers block 1-800 numbers?
I rececently switched over to a VOIP connection. Looking at my call records, I get several a day from various 800/866/877 numbers. I called a few of the most frequently appearing numbers, and the real were all Telcos. So, I would say, the Telcos are part of the problem.
(Also, in Canada, we have been slow to get a do-not-call registry running. The contract for running the registry was awarded to Bell Canada. The same pricks who call me over 10 times a month on their auto dialer.)
posted by kamelhoecker at 4:59 PM on April 2, 2008
I rececently switched over to a VOIP connection. Looking at my call records, I get several a day from various 800/866/877 numbers. I called a few of the most frequently appearing numbers, and the real were all Telcos. So, I would say, the Telcos are part of the problem.
(Also, in Canada, we have been slow to get a do-not-call registry running. The contract for running the registry was awarded to Bell Canada. The same pricks who call me over 10 times a month on their auto dialer.)
posted by kamelhoecker at 4:59 PM on April 2, 2008
1-800 and other toll free numbers do not map to actual phone extensions.
A telephone exchange has cables running to customer locations. Each of these has a geographic number (or range of numbers) attached. Calling them makes the phone ring.
When they call you, you will see the geographic number displayed.
Toll free numbers exist in the exchange, and are mapped over a geographic number, usually over several, often in different locations (so one national pizza number goes to your local store).
These numbers *can't* make outgoing calls. I think it is for this reason that some telco systems would not accept these numbers for call blocking.
Some call centers, particularly outsourced call centers, will configure their PABX to override their geographic exchange telephone numbers and instead send the toll free number of the organisation they are representing. This actually breaks the way the system is intended to work, but who is going to stop them?
posted by bystander at 10:17 PM on April 2, 2008 [1 favorite]
A telephone exchange has cables running to customer locations. Each of these has a geographic number (or range of numbers) attached. Calling them makes the phone ring.
When they call you, you will see the geographic number displayed.
Toll free numbers exist in the exchange, and are mapped over a geographic number, usually over several, often in different locations (so one national pizza number goes to your local store).
These numbers *can't* make outgoing calls. I think it is for this reason that some telco systems would not accept these numbers for call blocking.
Some call centers, particularly outsourced call centers, will configure their PABX to override their geographic exchange telephone numbers and instead send the toll free number of the organisation they are representing. This actually breaks the way the system is intended to work, but who is going to stop them?
posted by bystander at 10:17 PM on April 2, 2008 [1 favorite]
« Older Best conferences for technology law and policy? | Help me overcome my lightning phobia! Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by caddis at 11:00 AM on April 2, 2008 [1 favorite]