Re: Why Chat, etc., what do you make of this?????

Posted by clotho (63.144.102.130) on February 11, 2004 at 16:03:51:

In Reply to: Re: Why Chat, etc., what do you make of this????? posted by Why Chat on February 11, 2004 at 15:10:38:

I think they took the wrong route on this case - am I thinking correctly here - TILA applies to the OC AND is useful in defining the nature of CC and revolving accts. FDCPA applies to the CA and does not change the definition of CC/revolving accts under TILA even if the acct is CO and in collections.

What disturbs me about this case - if I am reading it correctly, is that the court found that Crap1 WAS NOT a 'debt collector' under FDCPA:

"Neff’s FDCPA claim fares no better. He argues that when Capital One sold his debt to CAMCO, the sale resulted in further collection action against him, when the debt should have been reflected as satisfied, in violation of the FDCPA.
That Act, however, applies only to debt collectors, Pettit v. Retrieval Masters Creditors Bureau, Inc., 211 F.3d 1057, 1059 (7th Cir. 2000), and only when their conduct is undertaken “in connection with the collection of any debt.” 15 U.S.C. § 1629e. See also 15 U.S.C. § 1629f (“[a] debt collector may not use unfair or unconscionable means to collect or attempt to collect any debt.”). Capital One was not a debt collector when it sold Neff’s account to CAMCO. 15
U.S.C. § 1692a(6) (defining a “debt collector” as any person who “regularly collects or attempts to collect, directly or indirectly, debts owed or due or asserted to be owed or due another.”). In selling its asset, Capital One did not directly or indirectly attempt to collect Neff’s debt. From the moment it sold Neff’s account, it was irrelevant to Capital One whether Neff’s account was collected or not. Capital One retained no ownership interest in Neff’s debt and CAMCO was not acting as its collection agency. Thus, on just a facial reading of the statute, Capital One was not a debt collector." Link to ruling below.

SO if a consumer settles a collection acct for less than full balance and the CA then sells (legally or not) the remain portion to another CA, the first one - since it recieved relief is no longer a debt collector?

• Like to ruling

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup