If you believe you are a victim of unfair or illegal debt collection tactics, submit your information to a FREE* Fair Debt Lawyer by:

The debt collector may just be liable to you for statutory damages of to $1,000, plus any actual damages suffered, plus attorney fees!

These 17 false or misleading tactics are prohibited according to section 807 of the FDCPA.

Debt collectors using deceptive and harassing collection tactics violate the fdcpa! Following are seventeen false and misleading tactics such as threatening arrest, imprisonment, seizure, garnishment, attachment, or sale of property or wages.

The tactics listed here are not an inclusive but they are the tactics reported to the FTC.

  1. False, deceptive, or misleading representation – 807
  2. Implying affiliation with the United States Government – 807(1)
  3. False representing the legal status of your debt – 807(2)
  4. Implying that individual is an attorney – 807(3)
  5. Implying or threatening nonpayment will result in your arrest – 807(4)
  6. Threat to take legal action not intended to be taken – 807(5)
  7. Falsely implying the loss of any claim or defense – 807(6)
  8. Falsely implying you committed a crime by not paying a debt – 807(7)
  9. Communicating false credit information – 807(8)
  10. Use of false documents that imply a state or federal source – 807(9)
  11. Falsely obtaining information about you – 807(10)
  12. Collectors must clearly explain how information will be used – 807(11)
  13. Implying your account(s) have been turned over to purchasers 807(12)
  14. Implying documents are a legal process when they are not – 807(13)
  15. Prohibits collectors from using false names – 807(14)
  16. Implying documents do not require action when they do – 807(15)
  17. Implying debt collector is employed by a CRA – 807(16)
  18. Non-profit debt consolidation help

1. Section 807 prohibits a debt collector from using any “false, deceptive, or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt.” It provides sixteen examples of false or misleading representations.

1. Scope. Prohibited actions are not limited to the sixteen subsections listed as examples of activities that violate this provision. In addition, section 807(10), which prohibits the “use of any false representation or deceptive means” by a debt collector, is particularly broad and encompasses virtually every violation, including those not covered by the other subsections.

2. Section 807(1) prohibits “the false representation or implication that the debt collector is vouched for, bonded by, or affiliated with the United States or any State . . .”

1. Symbol on dunning notice. A debt collector may not use a symbol in correspondence that makes him appear to be a government official. For example, a collection letter depicting a police badge, a judge, or the scales of justice, normally violates this section.

3. Section 807(2) prohibits falsely representing either “(A) the character, amount, or legal status of any debt; or (B) any services rendered or compensation which may be lawfully received by” the collector.

1. Legal status of debt. A debt collector may not falsely imply that legal action has begun.

2. Amount of debt. A debt collector may not claim an amount more than actually owed, or falsely assert that the debt has matured or that it is immediately due and payable, when it is not.

3. Judgment. When a debt collector provides the validation notice required by section 809(a)(4), the notice may include the words “copy of a judgment” whether or not a judgment exists, because section 809(a)(4) provides for a statement including these words. Compliance with section 809(a)(4) in this manner will not be considered a violation of section 807(2)(A).

4. Section 807(3) prohibits falsely representing or implying that “any individual is an attorney or that any communication is from an attorney.”

1. Form of legal correspondence. A debt collector may not send a collection letter from a “Pre-Legal Department,” where no legal department exists. An attorney may use a computer service to send letters on his own behalf, but a debt collector may not send a computer-generated letter deceptively using an attorney’s name.

2. Named individual. A debt collector may not falsely represent that a person named in a letter is his attorney.

3. Relation to other sections. If a creditor falsely uses an attorney’s name rather than his own in his collection communications, he loses both his exemption from the FDCPA’s definition of “debt collector” (Section 803(6)) and violates this provision.

5. Section 807(4) prohibits falsely representing or implying to the consumer that nonpayment “will result in the arrest or imprisonment of any [53 Fed. Reg. 50106] person or the seizure, garnishment, attachment, or sale of any property or wages of any person . . .”

6. Section 807(5) prohibits the “threat to take any action that cannot legally be taken or that is not intended to be taken.”

1. Debt collector’s statement of his own definite action. A debt collector may not state that he will take any action unless he intends to take the action when the statement is made, or ordinarily takes the action in similar circumstances.

2. Debt collector’s statement of definite action by third party. A debt collector may not state that a third party will take any action unless he has reason to believe, at the time the statement is made, that such action will be taken.

3. Statement of possible action. A debt collector may not state or imply that he or any third party may take any action unless such action is legal and there is a reasonable likelihood, at the time the statement is made, that such action will be taken. A debt collector may state that certain action is possible, if it is true that such action is legal and is frequently taken by the collector or creditor with respect to similar debts; however, if the debt collector has reason to know there are facts that make the action unlikely in the particular case, a statement that the action was possible would be misleading.

4. Threat of criminal action. A debt collector may not threaten to report a dishonored check or other fact to the police, unless he actually intends to take this action.

5. Threat of attachment. A debt collector may not threaten to attach a consumer’s tax refund, when he has no authority to do so.

6. Threat of legal or other action. Section 807(5) refers not only to a false threat of legal action, but also a false threat by a debt collector that he will report a debt to a credit bureau, assess a collection fee, or undertake any other action if the debt is not paid. A debt collector may also not misrepresent the imminence of such action.

A debt collector’s implication, as well as a direct statement, of planned legal action may be an unlawful deception. For example, reference to an attorney or to legal proceedings may mislead the debtor as to the likelihood or imminence of legal action.

A debt collector’s statement that legal action has been recommended is a representation that legal action may be taken, since such a recommendation implies that the creditor will act on it at least some of the time.

Lack of intent may be inferred when the amount of the debt is so small as to make the action totally unfeasible or when the debt collector is unable to take the action because the creditor has not authorized him to do so.

7. Illegality of threatened act. A debt collector may not threaten that he will illegally contact an employer, or other third party, or take some other “action that cannot legally be taken” (such as advising the creditor to sue where such advice would violate state rules governing the unauthorized practice of law). If state law forbids a debt collector from suing in his own name (or from doing so without first obtaining a formal assignment and that has not been done), the debt collector may not represent that he will sue in that state.

7. Section 807(6) prohibits falsely representing or implying that a transfer of the debt will cause the consumer to (A) lose any claim or defense, or (B) become subject to any practice prohibited by the FDCPA.

1. Referral to creditor. A debt collector may not falsely state that the consumer’s account will be referred back to the original creditor, who would take action the FDCPA prohibits the debt collector to take.

8. Section 807(7) prohibits falsely representing or implying that the “consumer committed any crime or other conduct in order to disgrace the consumer.”

1. False allegation of fraud. A debt collector may not falsely allege that the consumer has committed fraud.

2. Misrepresentation of criminal law. A debt collector may not make a misleading statement of law, falsely implying that the consumer has committed a crime, or mischaracterized what constitutes an offense by misstating or omitting significant elements of the offense. For example, a debt collector may not tell the consumer that he has committed a crime by issuing a check that is dishonored, when the statute applies only where there is a “scheme to defraud.”

9. Section 807(8) prohibits “Communicating or threatening to communicate to any person [false] credit information . . ., including the failure to communicate that a disputed debt is disputed.”

1. Disputed debt. If a debt collector knows that a debt is disputed by the consumer, either from receipt of written notice (section 809) or other means, and reports it to a credit bureau, he must report it as disputed.

2. Post-report dispute. When a debt collector learns of a dispute after reporting the debt to a credit bureau, the dispute need not also be reported.

NOTE: Under this circumstance, it is to you to notify the credit bureau that the debt is being disputed. See in-depth coverage of the Fair Credit Reporting Act Learn how to dispute the debt and repair your credit reports using these instructions and Free sample letters

10. Section 807(9) prohibits the use of any document designed to falsely imply that it issued from a state or federal source, or “which creates a false impression as to its source, authorization, or approval.”

1. Relation to other sections. Most of the violations of this section involve simulated legal process, which is more specifically covered by section 807(13). However, this subsection is broader in that it also covers documents that fraudulently appear to be official government documents, or otherwise mislead the recipient as to their authorship.

11. Section 807(10) prohibits the “use of any false representation or deceptive means to collect or attempt to collect any debt or to obtain information concerning a consumer.”

1. Relation to other sections. The prohibition is so comprehensive that violation of any part of section 807 will usually also violate subsection (10). Actions that violate more specific provisions are discussed in those sections.

2. Communication format. A debt collector may not communicate by a format or envelope that misrepresents the nature, purpose, or urgency of the message. It is a violation to send any communication that conveys to the consumer a false sense of urgency. However, it is usually permissible to send a letter generated by a machine, such as a computer or other printing device. A bona fide contest entry form, which provides a clearly optional location to enter employment information, enclosed with request for payment, is not deceptive.

3. False statement or implications. A debt collector may not falsely state or imply that a consumer is required to assign his wages to his creditor when he is not, that the debt collector has counseled the creditor to sue when he has not, that adverse credit information has been entered on the consumer’s credit record when it has not, that the entire amount is due when it is not, or that he cannot accept partial payments when in fact he is authorized to accept them.

4. Misrepresentation of law. A debt collector may not mislead the consumer as to the legal consequences of the consumer’s actions (e.g., by falsely implying that a failure to respond is an admission of liability).

A debt collector may not state that federal law requires a notice of the debt collector’s intent to contact third parties.

5. Misleading letterhead. A debt collector’s employee who is an attorney may not use “attorney-at-law” [53 Fed. Reg. 50107] stationery without referring to his employer, so as to falsely imply to the consumer that the debt collector had retained a private attorney to bring suit on the account.

12. Section 807(11) requires the debt collector to “disclose clearly in all communications made to collect a debt or to obtain information about a consumer, that the debt collector is attempting to collect a debt and that any information obtained will be used for that purpose,” except where section 804 provides otherwise.

1. Oral communications. A debt collector must make the required disclosures in both oral and written communications.

2. Disclosure to consumers. When a debt collector contacts a consumer and clearly discloses that he is seeking payment of a debt, he need not state that all information will be used to collect a debt, since that should be apparent to the consumer. The debt collector need not repeat the required disclosure in subsequent contacts.

A debt collector may not send the consumer a note saying only “please call me right away” unless there has been prior contact between the parties and the collector is thus known to the consumer.

3. Disclosures to third parties. Except when seeking location information, the debt collector must state in the first communication with a third party that he is attempting to collect the debt and that information will be used for that purpose, but need not do so in subsequent communications with that party.

13. Section 807(12) prohibits falsely representing or implying that “accounts have been turned over to innocent purchasers for value.”

1. Relation to other sections. Section 807(6)(A) prohibits a false statement or implication that threatening to affect the consumer’s rights may be affected by transferring the account; this subsection forbids falsely stating or implying that a transfer to certain parties has occurred.

14. Section 807(13) prohibits falsely representing or implying that “documents are legal process.”

1. Simulated legal process. A debt collector may not send written communications that deceptively resemble legal process forms. He may not send a form or a dunning letter that, taken as a whole, appears to simulate legal process. However, one legal phrase (such as “notice of legal action” or “show just cause why”) alone will not result in a violation of this section unless it contributes to an erroneous impression that the document is a legal form.

15. Section 807(14) prohibits the “use of any business, company, or organization name other than the [collector's] true name.”

1. Permissible business name. A debt collector may use a name that does not misrepresent his identity or deceive the consumer. Thus, a collector may use its full business name, the name under which it usually transacts business, or a commonly-used acronym. When the collector uses multiple names in its various affairs, it does not violate this subsection if it consistently uses the same name when dealing with a particular consumer.

2. Creditor misrepresentation of identity. A creditor may not use any name that would falsely imply that a third party is involved in the collection. The in-house collection unit of “ABC Corp.” may use the name “ABC Collection Division,” but not the name “XYZ Collection Agency” or some other unrelated name.

A creditor violates this section if he uses the name of a collection bureau as a conduit for a collection process that the creditor controls in collecting his own accounts. Similarly, a creditor may not use a fictitious name or letterhead, or a “post office box address” name that implies someone else is collecting his debts.

A creditor does not violate this provision where an affiliated (and differently named) debt collector undertakes collection activity, if the debt collector does business separately from the creditor (e.g., where the debt collector in fact has other clients that he treats similarly to the creditor, has his own employees, deals at arms length with the creditor, and controls the process himself).

3. All collection activities covered. A debt collection business must use its real business name, commonly-used name, or acronym in both written and oral communications.

4. Relation to other sections. If a creditor uses a false business name, he both loses his exemption from the FDCPA’s definition of “debt collector” (section 803(6)) and violates this provision. If a debt collector falsely uses the name of an attorney rather than his true business name, he violates section 807(3) as well as this section. When a debt collector uses a false business name in a phone call, he violates section 806(6) as well as this section.

When using the mails to obtain location information, a debt collector may not (unless expressly requested by the recipient to identify the firm) use a name that indicates he is in the debt collection business, or he will violate section 804(5). When a debt collector’s employee who is seeking location information replies to an inquiry about his employer’s identity under section 804(1), he must give the true name of his employer.

16. Section 807(15) prohibits falsely representing or implying that documents are not legal process forms or do not require action by the consumer.

1. Disguised legal process. A debt collector may not deceive a consumer into failing to respond to legal process by concealing the importance of the papers, thereby subjecting the consumer to a default judgment.

17. Section 807(16) prohibits falsely representing or implying that a debt collector operates or is employed by a “consumer reporting agency” as defined in the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

1. Dual agencies. The FDCPA does not prohibit a debt collector from operating a consumer reporting agency.

2. Misleading names. Only a bona fide consumer reporting agency may use names such as “Credit Bureau,” “Credit Bureau Collection Agency,” “General Credit Control,” “Credit Bureau Rating, Inc.,” or “National Debtors Rating.” A debt collector’s disclaimer in the text of a letter that the debt collector is not affiliated with (or employed by) a consumer reporting agency will not necessarily avoid a violation if the collector uses a name that indicates otherwise.

3. Factual issue. Whether a debt collector that has called itself a credit bureau actually qualifies as such is a factual issue, to be decided according to the debt collector’s actual operation.

Comments

  1. David Fekete says

    My Name is David Fekete, not David C. Fekete, this refers to Case No. 01-2005-CC-1738 do to the physical address the property of David Fekete have been seized not David C. Fekete and due to lack of evidence in the case and that laws have been broken it is illegally seized property. I am not like you, Robert Hiday, or Jeffrey R. Becker that does things behind peoples back without any kind of trial and destroying that person’s life I am letting you know, since according to my knowledge that you a criminal justice judge signed a writ of execution in a civil case without verification of documentation, that I will be filling a complaint against you and the Judge, Judge Green, that issued the final judgment withouit evidence against David C. Fekete and because of the same physical address it has been issued against me David Fekete by proxy. Due to Robert Hiday and Jeffrey R. Becker violating the law in maliciously and unethical coming after me and taking away my 2007 Dark Blue Metallic 2500HD Chevy Silverado Crew cab vin# 1GCHK23D07F192910 by you issusing the writ of execution you have made yourself an accessory. If you are not the Judge that issued the Writ of Execution then let me know which judge is reasonable for this unlawful Levy (writ).

    I know you and other judges hates Veterans and will do nothing to bring justice back into my life. I have over 160 pages of evidence that I never had a chance to present to a judge and I can’t afford to appeal the actions of any judge but you don’t care because you hates Veterans.

    I am a poor partially disable Marine Corps Veteran that is in pain everyday, it took me16 years to get that truck and in 2007 when I brought it was the same year I was graduating college and one thing I need for getting a good paying career in the computer field was a vehicle. In 2010 at the time you had my truck illegally seized I had a choice between 5 federal jobs starting at $85,000 and another starting at $95,000 which took me three years to get considered for those careers because I had reliable transportation which was the job requirement. Why did you take your hatred of Veterans out upon this partially disable Marine Corps Veteran?

    Three Rivers won’t take my case due to it would cost them too much. You tell me as others told me get a private attorney but with what money? Robert Hiday and Jeffrey R. Becker violated over 50 laws which can be proven but because they have relatives in the Florida Bar and the Florida’s D.A. office they will not be prosecuted so they are above the law. There is no justice for poor people in the court system, no justice at all and because there is no justice debt collecting lawyers or any lawyers can say what they want do what they want and take what they want without a trial and the poor person especially Veterans can’t do nothing about it.

    Did you know Robert Hiday/Thomas A. Hiday founded the fake corporation Dodge Enterprises Inc. to target poor people and Veterans?

    Did you know that Robert Hiday and Jeffrey R. Becker are part of the same law firm and Robert Hiday had Jeffrey R. Becker use the fake corporation, Dodge Enterprises Inc., to conspire against me for a debt that was never proven to exist? Even today when I ask for a copy of the statement or signed agreement they still produce none.

    Did you know that the debt was never validated even though I have been requesting a copy of a statement or signed agreement since 2004?

    Did you know that the judgment against David C. Fekete is based on lack of evidence to no evidence, proof of the debt ever existed?

    Did you know I David Fekete or David C. Fekete was never notified of any lien against David C. Fekete. I David Fekete found out about the liens until 08/22/2010.

    Did you know that I David Fekete have never used the name David C. Fekete when applying for credit or loans due to the fact my name by birth and to my SSN is David Fekete?

    Did you know I David Fekete is a partially disable Marine Corps Veteran whom is not suppose to walk for long distance or ride a bike everyday due to these physical ailments from the military : Stress fractures in both feet, deteriorating knee cartilage in both knees, lower back problems, arthritis in both hands, and severe seasonal allergies.

    Did you know that because you aided and abetted Robert Hiday/Jeffrey R. Becker in illegally seizing my 2007 Dark Blue Metallic 2500HD Chevy Silverado Crew cab vin# 1GCHK23D07F192910, you have caused me to loose my job due to a truck is required in construction, Information Technology, and Security Industries and forcing me, David Fekete, to ride a mountain 40+ miles a day for the past three years with 80lb of tools on my back causing the listed ailments to become worse and gave me hip problems now as well as extreme pain in my neck and shoulders.

    Did you know I have a condition with my left eye that I need to get to the VA eye clinic if I see a continuous blanket of darkness within 30mins or I will have permanent painful damage in my left eye.

    Why was not Dodge Enterprise Inc. listed on the writ of execution?

    Did you know it stated property of David C. Fekete and you had the sheriff steal the property of David Fekete?

    Did you know on the title of the 2007 Dark Blue Metallic 2500HD Chevy Silverado Crew cab vin# 1GCHK23D07F192910 it states David Fekete not David C. Fekete and I David Fekete still have the original Title

    Prior to 08/10/2010 no deposition was ever done I David Fekete was never informed of any court date case History may say otherwise but majority of time during those years I either had college classes or worked a double shift or was working in another county. For the past three years I have found that Robert Hiday/ Jeffrey R. Becker have violated over 50 laws and even the US Constitution especially the 7TH Amendment which I evoked, they did not tell you that did they?

    Do I not have the right to face my accusers and see the evidence they have against me?

    14th Amendment violated
    No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

    With the writ of execution forced upon me without due process or and kind of notification of the adverse action that will be taken against me without due process you have helped them deprive me of my life, my liberty and my property that I owned and with me still having the original title a government endorsed document I still own that property.

    Did Robert Hiday/Jeffrey R. Becker tell you they used my tag from a bogus seat belt ticket that they paid their buddies on GPD to obtain and went to http://www.flmvr.com to obtain my personal information without my knowledge?

    Four years later I still don’t have a vehicle and now I am in constant pain not only in me knees but in my hips from riding a bike 7 days a week to beg for work. Robert Hiday/Jeffrey R. Becker violated over 50 laws before during and after they took my truck making it an illegally seized vehicle. why did you not tell me they used this web site http://www.flmvr.com/ to find out my vehicle registration from a bogus seat belt ticket by the use of my tag number.

    On 05/12/10 at 09:20 when Robert Hiday/Jeffrey R. Becker used David Fekete, not David C. Fekete, tag number from a bogus seat belt citation, and obtain vehicle registration from the web site http://www.flmvr.com which the web site clearly states it is for information purposes only and that owners of the property must be informed of any adverse action per Federal Law.
    “All users subject to the Federal Trade Commission’s jurisdiction must comply with all
    applicable regulations, including regulations promulgated after this notice was
    prescribed in 2004. Information about applicable regulations currently in effect can be
    found at the Commission’s Web site, http://www.ftc.gov/credit. Persons not subject to the
    Commission’s jurisdiction should consult with their regulators to find any relevant
    regulations.
    NOTICE TO USERS OF CONSUMER REPORTS:
    OBLIGATIONS OF USERS UNDER THE FCRA”

    Sections they violated

    I. OBLIGATIONS OF ALL USERS OF CONSUMER REPORTS
    A. Users Must Have a Permissible Purpose
    B. Users Must Provide Certifications

    C. Users Must Notify Consumers When Adverse Actions Are Taken
    1. Adverse Actions Based on Information Obtained From a CRA
    2. Adverse Actions Based on Information Obtained From Third Parties Who Are
    Not Consumer Reporting Agencies
    3. Adverse Actions Based on Information Obtained From Affiliates
    II. CREDITORS MUST MAKE ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES
    IV. OBLIGATIONS WHEN INVESTIGATIVE CONSUMER REPORTS ARE USED

    Due to me not being notified by Robert Hiday and Jeffrey R. Becker what adverse actions they where going to take and violating the laws prior to the date of the report, 05/12/2010 09:20 my 2007 Dark Blue Metallic 2500HD Chevy Silverado Crew cab vin# 1GCHK23D07F192910 was illegally seized on 08/10/2010. Law States if at least one law was violated in the taking away of a persons property it is considered illegally seized and as per the US Constitution, any illegally seized property must be returned to the rightful owner without cost to that owner.

    From the year 2004 to 05/12/10 at 09:20 to 08/10/2010 no Deposition was ever conducted only after they took malicious and unethical action against David Fekete that they held a Deposition in 2012. From 2004 to today I David Fekete still have not received the validation I requested, even after I filed a complaint with the Florida Bar so again I request that a copy of the credit card bill, loan or mortgage statement, credit card application, loan application or mortgage application since Robert Hiday is the President/CEO of Dodge Enterprises Inc. and that Jeffrey R. Becker is the lawyer representing Dodge Enterprises Inc.

    Try to find the physical location of Dodge Enterprises Inc., you can’t like I told you it is a fake corporation and it is against federal law to use a fake corporation or entity to go after a person or their property but you did not use that information. if you look at the all documents submitted to the court pertaining this case you will see no copy of any kind of bills, balance statements or any kind of agreements submitted to the court but you did not even take that into consideration. I told I David Fekete was never informed of the court date in 2007 and all court documents states David C. Fekete.

    My birth certificate, drivers license, and Original Title (which I still have) states David Fekete but the writ of execution states property of David C. Fekete, you did not even look at that I have never used David C. Fekete on any financial application because that is not my birth name and that is why you will see in letters after letters which I did not have time to provide to you requesting validation even today but none was ever sent.

    After Robert Hiday/Jeffrey R. Becker found out I won the Grand prize on the Florida lottery bass pro shops 2nd chance drawing and that they had knowledge of Hudson&keyse going bankrupt they where in a rush to extort money from me so with any kind of notification of adverse action they were going to take and with no deposition they decide to take, illegally seize, my only vehicle and put me out of work and in a great deal of pain.

    All these fake companies are link to Robert Hiday, J B, lawyers at the law firm of Hiday&Ricke
    PO Box 551230 Jacksonville, FL 32255
    7 Companies Found at this Address
    1 Officer Found at this Address
    Companies Found at this Address
    Dodge Enterprises, Inc. (Does not exist at this address)
    4100 SOUTHPOINT DRIVE EAST
    SUITE 2
    JACKSONVILLE, FL 32216

    name used by one of the female lawyers at Hiday&Ricke
    Officer/Director Detail Name & Address

    WELLINGTON, TAMMY RVP
    16587 County Road 220 NS (Does not exist in Snyder, Ok exists in Frederick, Ok)
    Snyder, OK 73566
    http://www.dodgeenterprisesinc.com/
    Powers Partners, Inc.
    3600 JULINGTON CREEK ROAD
    JACKSONVILLE, FL 32223-3713
    Gerard Services, Inc. (does not exist at this strip mall)
    9802 BAYMEADOWS ROAD, SUITE 12 #116 (no such suite)
    JACKSONVILLE, FL 32256
    http://www.gerardservices.com/
    Rabun Holdings, LLC (Does not exist at this address)
    3600 JULINGTON CREEK ROAD
    JACKSONVILLE, FL 32223
    Broken Wheel, LLC (Does not exist at this address)
    3600 JULINGTON CREEK ROAD
    STE 2
    JACKSONVILLE, FL 32223
    Stornoway, LLC (Does not exist at this address)
    3600 JULINGTON CREEK ROAD
    JACKSONVILLE, FL 32223

    • says

      Thank you for your question. You may have experienced a Fair Debt violation(s), the Debt Help Lawyers at this site can provide you a free, no obligation Fair Debt consultation. The worst thing to do is nothing, so call us now at 888-595-9111 and we will get started figuring our how to help you!

  2. Kim says

    I have been getting calls for several months now from a lady who leaves voice mails on my home and cell phone. She never leaves her name or the name of the company she works for, but she provides a case reference number. The voice mails begin with a pre-recorded message that if this is not (my name) then please hang up, if this is (my name) then please listen to the following message. The lady only says that there has been a “formal complaint” filed against me in her office, gives a toll free number and then the pre-recorded message gives a case reference number.She then says that failure to receive a statement from me within 24 hours will basically waive my right to have any say in what happens next. I think this lady should have to reveal who she is, what company she is working for, and state that the call is an attempt to collect a debt if it is. The number that shows up on my caller ID is spoofed, too. I have left some of her voice mails on my phones to back up my claims, and my husband and mother-in-law have also heard her messages.

    • says

      You likely have experienced some sort of Fair Debt violation(s), the Debt Help Lawyers at this site can provide you a free, no obligation Fair Debt consultation. The worst thing to do is nothing, so call us now at 888-595-9111 and we will get started figuring our how to help you!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>