http://www.studentloanfairness.ca/index.php?name=Sections&req=viewarticle&artid=187&page=1

The above link discusses what's happening with a lot of the student loans in Canada. The 2 banks got out of the business in 2000 and Nelnet of Lincoln Nebraska took over their admin and collection through a Canadian subsidiary, Edulinx. There was a stink about an American owned subsidiary having almost carte blanche access to Canadian students' private info because of the Patriot Act. And so, later on in 2007, Edulinx was sold to an outfit called Resolve Corporation of Toronto. They are located in the Laird/Eglinton (Leaside) area at 210 Wicksteed Ave almost beside where I used to work a long time ago. Tel 416 421-2920.

I didn't say your student loan was sold; in fact, I haven't followed student loans much for a couple of years and so I'm don't know the minutiae of what is being done with them. That's why I mentioned Leblanc who you said you were going to use, or at least refer to the student loan forum he has. Anyhow, it seems that it likely wasn't sold and they probably sent it to Global Collections on Warden Avenue. Unfortunately, their legal eagles (or some other less attractive bird) are Deanna Natale or Mark Silverthorn and that's why I thought you'd be getting a letter from one of them. Hell, everyone else in Canada has.

It may be the Government isn't giving permission to Natale to sue the students and that's why she's not involved in it. But this is all speculation on my part, and so that's why I wanted you to check it out with the LeBlanc's forum.

Ray

Raymond,

Thanks for the response and I apologize for the late reply.

Curious though.. I seem to have one agency threatening legal action over the outstanding debt they hold. The amount is ~15k if one were to include accumulated interest to date; and the debt was defaulted on ~1.5yrs ago.

Now, after digesting your comments, this leaves me wondering why the original creditor would sell this debt if they felt it was collectable? Unfortunately, off-hand, I don't recall if this agency is acting on behalf of the creditor or if they purchased the debt? In addition, my thinking is that surely the agency contemplating a lawsuit must have underwent some sort of due diligence process and concluded there would be a chance to easily recover these funds. If this is the case, what would they look at aside from a credit bureau file – by that is there a national registry that lists “all” of ones material possessions’? I essentially have no assets worth sticking a lean on, so obtaining a default judgment then monitoring me for the next several years seems fruitless.

I have a few other questions dancing around in my head, but I’ll hold off in poorly-articulating those for now until I review any feedback from today’s questions. Perhaps the answers I receive will assist me in both the next phase of research, as well as, the compiling of my remaining thoughts.

Thanks again.

O.C.

Sorry, I missed your last blog. I'm up pretty late because I picked up a nasty virus that kept singing to me "And I'm telling you I'm not going." It was harder to get rid of than a collection agent but it did go.

With respect to (iii), the collection agency, if they purchase the debt, obtains all the rights that go along with it. Since they are now the creditor, they can sue you after sending you a notice of its purchase along with disclosure they intend to sue you. They don't have to prove they own the debt to you. They'll have to prove it to the judge of course. Again, the 2 year rule applies in Ontario for unsecured debts that went into default after Jan.1, 2004.

As a matter of practice, virtually all of them will threaten to sue you, but probably most won't. If the debtor was such a good candidate for recovery, most likely the original creditor wouldn't have sold it for a song to begin with.

Ray

Raymond, is this the section you were directing me to?

23. (1) No collection agency or collector shall directly or indirectly threaten, or state an intention, to commence a legal proceeding for the collection of a debt, unless the collection agency or collector has the written authority of the creditor to commence the proceeding, and the proceeding is not otherwise prohibited by law. O. Reg. 103/06, s. 2.

(2) No collection agency or collector shall recommend to a creditor that a legal proceeding be commenced for collection of a debt, unless the collection agency or collector first gives notice to the debtor of its intention to make the recommendation. O. Reg. 103/06, s. 2.

(3) No collection agency or collector shall commence a legal proceeding for the collection of a debt,

(a) in the name of the creditor, unless the collection agency or collector has the written authority of the creditor to do so; or

(b) as a plaintiff, unless the following conditions have been satisfied:

(i) The creditor has assigned the debt to the collection agency or collector by written instrument and for valuable consideration, and the creditor has no further interest in the debt.

(ii) If a legal proceeding was commenced by the creditor prior to assigning the debt, the collection agency or collector has given written notice to the debtor of the assignment.

(iii) If a legal proceeding was not commenced by the creditor prior to assigning the debt, the collection agency or collector has given written notice to the debtor of the assignment and, either separately or together with the written notice of assignment, has given notice to the debtor of its intention to commence a legal proceeding. O. Reg. 103/06, s. 2.

-->
If this is the case, does that imply that once the debt is charged off and sold, the original creditor has absolved themselves in any future activity in the said debt/account? 3-b-i would suggest that a collector/agency may initiate proceedings so long as the creditor has no further interest in the debt; i.e. the debt has been sold to a 3rd party (the C.A. at hand).

3-b-iii leads me to think that as long as the C.A. discloses proof of the being assigned the debt, they may proceed with legal recourse.

If either is the case, I'm left to feel that perhaps a C.A. does have legal legs to stand on with respect to a lawsuit. Am I misreading this?

O.C.

http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_90c14_e.htm

http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/regs/english/elaws_regs_900074_e.htm

You forgot to hit the expander button (i.e., the "+" sign) on the Service Ontario e-laws website link for the Collection Act. There are actually 2 parts. The relevant prohibited practices are contained in Sections 20 to 25 of Regulation 74 which is the second link and Section 22 of the first link.

You can read them if you want, but collection agencies don't pay too much attention to these laws. Why should they; they're not enforced.

Ray

This topic has floated around this forum for sometime now, and it's left me obtaining copies of the:

Personal Property Security Act:
http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/Statutes/English/elaws_statutes_90p10_e.htm

Ontario Limitation Act:
http://www.canlaw.com/lawyers/limitation.htm

The Collection Agencies Act, Ontario
http://www.canlaw.com/credit/collect.htm

Although I've yet to read through all of the acts., I'm wondering if someone can point me to the summary/article which states the "powers" a 3rd party collection agency holds? Perhaps this can be found within one of these documents? I suppose I'm asking for some help in narrowing the search down.

TIA.

O.C.