Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

mahatmakanejeeves

(57,512 posts)
Fri May 16, 2014, 12:41 PM May 2014

Taking on the country’s biggest debt buyer, Midland Funding

Taking on the country’s biggest debt buyer, Midland Funding

By Danielle Douglas, Published: May 9

....
Midland has sued thousands of people just like {Leoncio} Paz in hopes of a quick payday. The company has a reputation of buying soured credit card debt and heading straight to court to collect, a tactic that consumer lawyers say scares people into settling. ...
The strategy has been so effective that in Northern Virginia alone Midland has recovered more than $27 million since 2003 — a year the firm filed a few dozen cases at most. But in the past four years, it has flooded courts from Loudoun County to Prince William County with nearly 11,000 lawsuits as companies overwhelmed by delinquent accounts have sold them for pennies on the dollar.

And it’s not just Northern Virginia. State attorneys general, judges and consumer lawyers nationwide are complaining of a broken debt collection system that allows companies such as Midland to file tens of thousands of cases built on flimsy documentation.
....

Paz was surprised when Midland came knocking. He did not, after all, take out a credit card with the firm. It bought his debt from the lender who issued the card. Midland is a unit of Encore Capital Group, a San Diego-based corporation that buys portfolios of charged-off debt — delinquent accounts that lenders give up on. ... These “debt buyers” often purchase no more than an electronic file of names, addresses and amounts owed on accounts that are more than 180 days past due. More detailed information is usually available, but it would cost more and therefore would cut into their profits.
....

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau plans to issue rules to fix these problems this year, but it is unclear whether those rules will radically alter the business model of debt buyers and reduce the number of cases clogging court calendars.


Among the comments was this one:

RogerRamjet2
5/10/2014 11:19 PM EDT

What are some of these debts Midland owns like? Providian Bank is a good example of the typical lenders, and this is how it works for those that default.

A guy gets a credit card with an Account Agreement that charges him $137 to open the account the first time he uses the card, and the card has a $250 credit limit. He then buys a $35 iron and a $45 coat at Walmart with the card. He now owes $217 the next month, and when he doesn't pay the bill, he accrues an interest charge of $5 at 29% interest. When he doesn't pay the next month, the card accrues a late charge of $35, $5 in interest, and an overdraft fee of $35 a month, totaling $297. The following month, interest is $6, and the late fee is $35 and the overdraft fee is again $35. A year and a half after the initial $80 purchase, the account shows a $1600 balance to Providian Bank. Totally legal.

Providian then sells the debt to Midland for $0.17 on the dollar, or around $200, and gives the last statement the guy received for $1600 as evidence of the debt. Glasser & Glasser in Norfolk is promptly retained to sue the guy for $1600, with interest at 29%, and accrued interest since the default a year before totaling $500, while the Account Agreement is invoked for a "33.3% reasonable attorney's fee, totaling $533" and court costs of $63.00. An affidavit from Midland and Providian is generated, and a sheriff delivers the Warrant in Debt to the guy.

Total sued for? $2,693, but we will gladly settle for a lump sum of eighty cents on the dollar, or $2,154. For an iron and a coat at Walmart. Or we will take a judgment and garnish 25% of your wages until paid, and in three years the balance will double again at 29% interest.

How do I know this? I worked for Glasser as local counsel, and it worked in Fairfax, Winchester, Fredericksburg, Roanoke, Virginia Beach and Richmond. I got paid $15 to say "Judgment on the Affidavit," and slowly sold my soul.
6 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Taking on the country’s biggest debt buyer, Midland Funding (Original Post) mahatmakanejeeves May 2014 OP
Selling debt should be illegal. Rod Beauvex May 2014 #1
Sick elleng May 2014 #2
This should be illegal PumpkinAle May 2014 #3
This is why we need Elizabeth Warren to at least run for president. JDPriestly May 2014 #4
They sued me here in TX and I won - TBF May 2014 #5
TBF, I’m glad you fought. Debt collectors actually count on consumers failing to appear ms.smiler May 2014 #6

PumpkinAle

(1,210 posts)
3. This should be illegal
Fri May 16, 2014, 01:47 PM
May 2014

but corporations are people my friend - The more the real We the People try to do something, the more the corporations put the stranglehold on us.

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
4. This is why we need Elizabeth Warren to at least run for president.
Fri May 16, 2014, 03:33 PM
May 2014

If you read her book, A Fighting Chance, you will understand that she is one of the few politicians who understands what creeps are running our financial services and banking sectors. Creeps. That's what they are. They'd dig up corpses and sell them for dog food if they could. I'm not angry. Just disgusted with them.

They have higher IQs than the folks to whom they sell credit cards. Instead of doing something positive for the world with their God-given intelligence, they try to drag down the less clever. That's what I call a creep.

I have to add that one of the most disgusting practices of financial institutions is to obtain a guarantor, the signature of someone who has money, for the debt of primary borrower, a person who is obviously unable to pay the debt based on an analysis of his credit and employment histories.

As would be easily predicted, the primary borrower or debtor fails to pay and the creditor goes after the guarantor. Usually the guarantor is some kindly relative or friend who does not understand what he has agreed to at all. It's like taking candy from a baby. Usually with this scam, the lender knows that the guarantor is the one with assets, the one who will pay. The guarantor feels sorry for the primary debtor and wants to help. He is the good guy who gets suckered in and doesn't even get the stuff the primary debtor bought at Walmart.


Government does not care. It all looks so fair. But it isn's fair at all to the good guy who lent his good credit to someone he felt sorry for and wanted to help. The banks have to be better regulated. They should have to ascertain that the borrower has the means to pay back a debt. And they should be limited with regard to the fees and interest rates they may chart.

Americans should be encouraged to save, not to borrow. The first step toward reaching that goal is to raise the minimum wage so that people can save.

TBF

(32,068 posts)
5. They sued me here in TX and I won -
Fri May 16, 2014, 05:43 PM
May 2014

well, won would be an exaggeration but my attorney got the case thrown out. But Texas is strong for the consumer in this area (a surprise I know) - and if you fight back they've got to produce their records showing what you owe. I have a feeling that these companies buy the "debt" but may not get the back-up they need to actually try the cases.

In other states consumers may have way fewer rights though.

ms.smiler

(551 posts)
6. TBF, I’m glad you fought. Debt collectors actually count on consumers failing to appear
Mon May 19, 2014, 02:45 PM
May 2014

so they can win by default because nearly always, they can’t prove the alleged debt. Debt buyers don’t get much information or documentation for their .02 to .03 on the dollar. Even if the debt is legitimate, the amount they attempt to collect or sue for is inflated and unlawful.

Unless a debt is known and valid such as $238 a consumer might owe their dentist, no consumer should admit to a debt. Just because some company calls and claims a debt exists, doesn’t mean the debt is valid, the supposed amount is correct or that they are the party with the right to collect that debt.

I’m a business owner and I’ve researched mortgage/foreclosure/securities fraud for the past 5 years. As a business person I don’t recognize debt collection as legitimate business, it’s a racket to me. The banks don’t have their money at risk since nearly all debt is securitized and sold to investors. The banks collect fees, commissions and Credit Default Swaps plus sell off account information to debt buyers.

Here in PA, I’ve helped prepare Answers for friends who were sued and gone to court with them to watch them win. Even when counsel for the debt collector had a few supposed statements, they couldn’t produce a full accounting or a signed contract. I heard one attorney tell the court that banks don’t retain even a copy of the signed application/contract as an explanation for his empty-handedness.

Debt collection is not productive, nor does it create value. It simply transfers wealth from trusting, honest hard working people to unproductive, illicit, unworthy wealthy parties.

After a family member passed I received a few calls from debt collectors about alleged debts. While I am honest and hard working, I’m certainly not trusting or ill informed. I know better than to open my checkbook to scammers.

TBF, you didn’t exaggerate, you won. Rather than simply accept their claim, you stood up and required them to prove up their case. You foiled their scam.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Economy»Taking on the country’s b...