Collection Agencies - Financial Debt Recovery Limited -Scamming Me? - Canada

a good place to talk about links

RE: Financial Debt Recovery Limited -Scamming Me?

Postby angella » Thu Sep 06, 2007 12:47:27 PM

At least... in Alberta. I would suspect though, that careful scrutiny of the relevant legislation of other provinces will turn up similar regulations.
angella
Member
Posts: 461
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 03:28:32 PM
Province:


RE: Financial Debt Recovery Limited -Scamming Me?

Postby Raymond » Thu Sep 06, 2007 12:40:09 PM

Yep, of course section 1 (b) refers to a debt buyer and (D) doesn't. Instead, (D) refers to the normal purchase by a business of account receivables. Sorry, about that. As you can see when I originally posted it the last part of (D) was missing and so I just saw the debt buyer portion. When I reviewed it, I missed transcribing most of what sentence said. And so, only the original creditor, it appears has the right to pursue a non judgment default to the gates of hell.

As I said to a disgruntled "advocate," more than one hour continously at the computer screen and I get snow blindness unless I walk away.

Ray
Raymond
Member
Posts: 1420
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 12:44:29 AM
Province: ON


RE: Financial Debt Recovery Limited -Scamming Me?

Postby angella » Thu Sep 06, 2007 12:21:46 PM

Section 1(i)(B) refers to a debt buyer.... being a person who purchases debts that are in arrears... as being a collection agency.

Section 1(i)(D) exempts those who acquire accounts receivable as part of the purchase of an entire business including the a/r or who merges with another business acquiring the a/r. This would refer to, for example, Wells Fargo's acquisition of TransCanada Credit - the location, the employees, and the accounts receivable.

angella
Member
Posts: 461
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 03:28:32 PM
Province:


RE: Financial Debt Recovery Limited -Scamming Me?

Postby Raymond » Thu Sep 06, 2007 12:17:52 PM

Section 12 .1 opens by saing that "NO COLLECTION AGENCY OR COLLECTOR MAY......." So what follows including (x) in that section refers only to those 2 groups. A collection agency is not the same as a debt buyer and if you read sections 2 and 3, you see they are not allowed to act as both simultaneously.

Reprinting the definitions from Section 1

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Definitions

1 In this Regulation,

(a) “Act” means the Fair Trading Act;

(b) “collection agency” means a person, OTHER than a collector or debt repayment agent,

(i) who carries on the activities of collecting or attempting to collect a debt or debts from a debtor in Alberta under any name that differs from that of the creditor to whom the debt is or was originally owed, regardless of to whom or where the payment is made,

(A) on behalf of another person, or

(B) where the person has purchased a debt or debts that is or are in arrears,

BUT DOES NOT INCLUDE

(C) a person who is collecting or attempting to collect a debt of which the person is the original creditor or owner,

(D) a business that purchases a debt or debts through acquiring or merging with a business in a transaction that includes the transfer of accounts receivable,

(E) a business that acquires a debt or debts through the seizure of accounts receivable under a security agreement, or

(F) a person to whom the contract that gave rise to the debt was assigned for the purpose of financing the transaction,

or

(ii) who carries on the activities of a debt repayment agency;

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now you can see that (C) is the party who is the original creditor and (D) is a debt buyer, while (E) is a business that is making seizures of assets to recover secured loans defaulted on; that is to say, it does not refer to a company that is specifically in the business of buying debts.

And so the Act specifically exempts both the original creditor and whoever may have bought the debt from them as a principle, from the 6 year limit of pursuit.

In other words, if you owe me money, I can bug you forever about it and so can anyone who I sell the debt to. It seems they would only come under the purview of Section 12.1(X) if I or the debt buyer decide to hire either a collection agent or agency to help me recover the money from you.

Ray
Raymond
Member
Posts: 1420
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 12:44:29 AM
Province: ON


RE: Financial Debt Recovery Limited -Scamming Me?

Postby angella » Thu Sep 06, 2007 11:42:50 AM

And actually, reading the definition crap that I usually skip over, section one specifically includes debt buyers as collection agents.
angella
Member
Posts: 461
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 03:28:32 PM
Province:


RE: Financial Debt Recovery Limited -Scamming Me?

Postby angella » Thu Sep 06, 2007 11:27:22 AM

When I was speaking to the government, they told me that even if they are debt buyers they are bound by collection legislation.
angella
Member
Posts: 461
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 03:28:32 PM
Province:


RE: Financial Debt Recovery Limited -Scamming Me?

Postby Raymond » Thu Sep 06, 2007 11:19:02 AM

Yes, I see, by Section 12 (x) of the amended version of Alberta's Fair Trading Act, they've prohibited collection agencies from pursuing non judgment debts that are more than 6 years old.

The original act was written in 1999, the same time as the new limitation period of 2 years came into force and yet it doesn't seem to prohibit the 2 year stats barred debts from attempted recovery for an additional 4 years. I'm not sure why no ammendment was added.

Irregardless, the rule is a great idea. Nontheless, there's still nothing stopping a creditor, a secondary or even a third debt buyer who becomes the principle or their collection lawyers from pusuing the debt indefinitely as far as I know.

They wouldn't be governed by by Section 12 since it refers to collection agencies only, although it certainly is a good thing to know. Probably, or a least possibly, in Claymore's case, the debt was sold to a debt buyer, many of who have morphed into multipart outfits while maintaining separate legal entities in order to escape the more restrictive guidelines which simple collection agencies are required to adhere to (but seldom do anyway).

Ray
Raymond
Member
Posts: 1420
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 12:44:29 AM
Province: ON


RE: Financial Debt Recovery Limited -Scamming Me?

Postby angella » Thu Sep 06, 2007 10:47:12 AM

http://www.qp.gov.ab.ca/documents/Regs/1999_194.cfm?frm_isbn=0779743393

Section 12(x)

(x) pursue a non judgment debt where the last payment or written acknowledgement by the debtor is more than 6 years previous;
angella
Member
Posts: 461
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 03:28:32 PM
Province:


RE: Financial Debt Recovery Limited -Scamming Me?

Postby Raymond » Thu Sep 06, 2007 10:31:49 AM

They can't even call you about it in Alberta? Er, where did you see that?

Ray
Raymond
Member
Posts: 1420
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 12:44:29 AM
Province: ON


RE: Financial Debt Recovery Limited -Scamming Me?

Postby angella » Thu Sep 06, 2007 10:23:29 AM

No, I get that. What I'm saying is that in Alberta, if the debt is more than 6 years from the last payment on it they're not allowed to even phone you about it.
angella
Member
Posts: 461
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 03:28:32 PM
Province:


,

Return to Collection Agencies - Discussion Area