this is my email address,please send out the account number to which you want cheques made out to,thanx ron mccabe

Thank you, perplexed, but of course we wouldn't contest the amount in court. But we would ask for mediation to arrange for a payment schedule we can handle -- which we'll probably get since they'd have to go through that step later anyway as judgment creditors. From what I've been able to see online, the original proposal we made (and faithfully stuck to) is well within most mediated payment schedules.

As for them spinning up our debt, what good would that do them? We don't have any assets or investments or property. We're older and not likely to "strike it rich" any time soon. They can wear themselves out, but it won't mean that they'll get anything from us any faster. I mean, if you can't collect on a $10,000, what would be the point of winding it up to $20,000? You'll only end up with a bigger loss on your books.

Recording the calls has certainly changed their demeanor in that they no longer yell hysterically at us, but now they phone us, put us on hold, and then hang up in a snit. Seriously, we must have 6-8 hangups recorded so far, and yet, they accuse US of game playing. Here we're really being sincere with these people -- we've never refused to take their calls, and never been rude to them (...although I'll admit, sometimes when they start getting ridiculous, it's hard not to chuckle a little). If our recording the calls bothers them so much, one wonders what they'd do differently if we weren't recording the calls.

I fully expect this one will go to court, and frankly, we're set for that if that's really the only way they'll accept that we're being completely honest with them about our ability to pay and our assets.

The funny thing about all this is that it's deja vu for us. Twenty years ago or more now, we had a weird situation happen with Canadian Tire's legal department. My husband went to buy gas, and the pump ate his card. It advised him to see the gas bar manager. So he went in and spoke with the young woman behind the counter, and she told him there was really nothing she could do. (I should note that the card was in completely good standing -- in fact, it's been in completely good standing for decades, up until a few months ago. So it wasn't his fault that his card was eaten.) In a hurry to get to work, he forgot the nozzle was still in the car, and pulled away. However, this was a very low-speed incident. He trudged back in to speak to the gas bar clerk again, and she had him fill out a form and made some vague reference to some plastic facing being damaged.

He forgot to even tell me about it. A month later, I get a call from this totally insane sounding person demanding payment for damages. I phoned my husband and he told me what happened (and I chewed him out for having signed something admitting to damages without thorough documentation). I called the guy back and he had already jacked up the amount we "owed" by double -- like you say, head spinning theatrics. Over the course of our conversation, he eventually had it jacked up to over $5000. At that point, I demanded to speak to his supervisor. He handed the phone over and said, loud enough for me to hear, that I was a "real bitch."

The second person I spoke with was very nice. I asked her how it could be that he could jack up the amount so severely over the course of a couple hours. She said that the invoices they were working with were "very complicated" and if I could only see them... but I could! I asked her to fax and she did.

I should note that I managed a gas station briefly in high school. I looked at the invoices, and much of it was for new construction being done to expand the gas bar. Most telling was the time frame between the date of the incident and the recalibration of the pump. Margins for gas stations are not so high that they can allow for much time to go by before getting a pump recalibrated, and legally they can't sell from the pump if it isn't calibrated. When I spoke with the "supervisor" again, I brought these issues to her attention, and she said she'd look into them and get back to me. That was September.

The following Easter Week, I got a call from someone else at Canadian Tire saying that she was calling to see how they were going to close the file. I started to tell her what had happened before, and she immediately said, "that person is no longer with us." She asked what we wanted to do, and I said that, in light of the fact that there was confusion over what the actual damages were, we'd be more comfortable having it decided by a judge. She said she'd look into it and get back to me. Never heard from them since.

But I must admit, that really put us off Canadian Tire at the time. It was hard for us to believe that an iconic Canadian company would allow themselves to be represented by someone so unprofessional. Sadly, even though the damage wasn't appropriately documented, if they'd been more professional and come up with a firm amount for damages and stuck to it, we probably would have forked it over, no questions asked. As it turned out, they got nothing because they turned some thug loose on us.

And now we're starting to see a pattern.

So basically, we're not contesting the amount we owe, only how quickly we can pay it off. We've made a proposal and stuck to it, but if they're not happy with that, then of course they're within their rights to go to court. It wouldn't be my first choice, and I don't think it's in their best interest either, but if it's going to happen anyway, then all we can do is educate ourselves and be well-prepared. I have a little experience providing support to defense or parties with legal standing in court, and I know it's always a crap shoot to some degree, but too, I know that going to small claims court rarely results in a satisfactory outcome for the creditor.

To Raymond. SOL stands for statute of limitations of a debt. Unless I do not understand your response, I don't think my question was answered..

Dear Valley Spirit-You sound like good people. Too bad. Good or bad, creditors do not care. I, fully, agree that creditors have a nasty hand in increasing and encouraging the use of credit. They also know that for every one credit that they extend three or more will pay albeit they struggle or not. So bottom line is this, the courts do not care. They are there to listen to the case, more often the creditors case or whomever has your account. The creditor is always in control. The court is there to enforce any decision that the creditor makes concerning you. That is it. My advice is that you take a good lawyer with you because if you do not you will be paying a lot more than your original outstanding balance. I have seen it and believe me it is not pretty. MJR capital will multiply your debt so quickly your head will be spinning. Answer any call to court. Fill in your paperwork immediately and do not allow the file to go into a judgement. Only then will you have a small chance of settling. However, MJR does not settle easily. The courts know the company very well, Joel Miskin in particular. He is a gross individual and cares very little. He is not there to settle but to stretch out your debt as much as possible especially if he knows that you have assets that he can lien or a job that you are relying on.

Our account got turned over to MJR. What a joke that company is! They're practically hysterical. Is Canadian Tire bank going to go under because we can't make our minimum payment?

When we first realized we were in trouble, we proactively sat down, looked at our finances and determined what we could commit to paying per month. We sent the company a letter saying that we understood that our credit privileges would be revoked, but that we would make a monthly payment of at least $50 or more if we could afford more. We also asked them to cut our interest rate or eliminate it altogether. They immediately flipped us to MJR.

After a couple disturbing calls from MJR, we got online, educated ourselves about collections agencies and about our options and potential outcomes. Now when they call, they refuse to speak to me (my husband is the primary on the account) and they get very nervous if they think I'm listening. We also started recording all their calls, and that seems to put them off a bit. They have accused us of "game playing" -- but they admit that they also record the calls.

Maybe I just don't understand high finance here, but it seems to me that CT Bank is cutting off it's nose to spite its face. We've been with them for many years. Over those years, we charged a number of things and we always made at least our minimum monthly payments (most of which were interest) -- and they rewarded this by sending us letters of appreciation and ... upping our credit limit.

Truly, we shouldn't have used the credit. In the backs of our minds, I think we realized that things were spiraling out of control. But they were happy and we were happy, so we didn't worry about it. The argument can also be made that they shouldn't have extended us so much credit. MJR is on the phone with us now demanding information about our employment, assets, etc. (which we're not answering). I may be old school, but it seems to me that, back in the day, lenders would ask those questions BEFORE loaning you money.

If CT Bank would have gone with our proposal, they would have recovered the full balance owing to the date that we sent our letter. It might have taken some time, and early payments would have been admittedly considerably less than what they'd like in a minimum payment -- but as our circumstances improved (which I'm sure they will), we would have worked at clearing away the balance as quickly as possible. And we would have appreciated their willingness to be flexible with us. Instead, by taking this route, they're paying a third party and will likely only recover cents on the dollar.

But worse, they've generated considerable bad will in our household for Canadian Tire. We won't shop there anymore. (And sure, I know that losing our business isn't going to sink them -- but a customer here and a customer there -- it adds up.)

A significant factor in our being unable to make our minimum payment at this time is because my customers are also experiencing hardship. But I'm not treating them the way that Canadian Tire is treating me -- I simply can't afford to! For one thing, people are more likely to use my services in a time of need than in good times -- and so it would be foolish of me to repel business during bad times. I don't want people thinking that they can't get my services when they really need them just because they can't pay up promptly. Rather, I'm working with my customers, telling them not to worry, let's focus on getting them what they need, and I have faith that they'll pay me when they can. And that's true. In past downturns, almost everyone I ever extended some latitude to has payed me off in full eventually. I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of people who've ripped me off in the past 25 years or so.

But more than that, I couldn't buy enough advertising to equal the benefits of good will and referrals that I've received from the approach I take to working with customers during tough times. The biggest thing hurting my business right now are the customers staying away because they can't afford to pay me on the usual terms.

I'm not in anyway trying to mitigate our own culpability in this matter. I'm simply saying that all along, CT Bank was our partner in foolishness. If it's wrong to use credit you have no collateral to back up, then surely it's even more wrong to extend credit under those circumstances. What if we'd been both taken out in a highway accident? We don't own a home, we don't have any savings or investments -- they'd have gotten squat. They have an advantage in that we're both alive and willing to work with them to clear up this mutual mistake, and they're squandering it.

We'll pay our price for our mistakes -- at our age, we'll probably never have good credit again. I'm just surprised that they'd rather generate bad will in exchange for cents on the dollar than to work with people that, by their own accounts (of which we have numerous letters on file to attest) have been valued customers for years. Weird.

VS

Well, what I said about CTC Bank still goes. They're one of the ones that will sue anyone even if they have no significant assets or income. Anyone is free to sue anyone else so there's not much you can do other than what I suggested.

If you are only able to make token payments, the best bet is still to try for a pretrial or trial small claims court settlement of easy payments with no interest accumulation. Ask for 30 to 50 bucks a month perhaps. It depends on what judge you get that day and how you present yourself.

The way you're doing it now; (ie, sending in post dated cheques for payments) will cause the R9 to stay on your credit report for 6 years after you make the final payment - which might add several years to the original 6 year period. Meanwhile, the 18% or so interest will be accumulating and compounding each month. Over 100 bucks a month will be required just to service the interest alone. If that's all you're going to be able to cover, small claims court is the best bet. Collection agents have the personalities of Nazi prson camp guards (and no, I'm not exaggerating) and so obviously, there's no point in trying to secure an arrangement with them unless you're in a position to pay them a substantial portion of the money.

If the outstanding balance really gets out of hand, then bankruptcy might be an alternative - however, it would be a shame for a small amount like $7000. That's why I said, most often, in cases similar to yours, the best bet is to call their bluff and let them sue you. You have nothing to lose and lots to gain.

Nonetheless, if you decide to settle up with them without going to court, you might want to try to have the debt settled with a consumer proposal. No interest will accumulate, but you will be an R7 for up to 4 years and then an R5 for 2 more. Not a whole lot better than declaring bankruptcy - although a collection agent will swear up and down that it is. But then, collection agents do a lot of swearing, especially when they're foiled. Ever watch seagulls in a Kentucky Fried Chicken parking lot?

Ray

QUOTE - "Canadian Tire Mastercard (which is really Canadian Tire Bank) is one of the nastier, albeit in a more polite way, creditors out there. Most of the banks won't give permission for their collection agency to sue someone for $7000 if the creditor is found to be without significant income or assets. No point in issuing a writ of sezure on their real property if they don't have any or are unlikely to acquire it in the near future.Also no point in trying to get the local sheriff to seize a bank account or garnish a wage if it doesn't exist.

However, Martha Billies and Canadian Tire Bank will do this even with debtors no matter how destitute they are.

That $75 you paid them was not a good idea. They're not going to be interested in good will gestures; they want all the mullah. They're right out of a Charles Dickens Novel. They weren't kidding when they started using the Ebenizir Scrooge character in their Christmas commercials.

All you're doing when you make token payments like that is renewing the Ontario 2 year statute of limitation period on the debt. But if CTB is going to sue you, they'll almost surely do so early on when the account is with the first (round) collection agency. An account that size would likely be rotated to as many as 4, 5 or 6 agencies every 3 to 6 months before the creditor bites the bullet or sells it off for a quarter penny on the dollar to guys like ARO in Kelowna or PMS in London, Ont.

If you really are destitute and they still take you to Small Claims Court, there will be a mandatory pretrial conference before the trial. Explain your situation to the judge and you will more than likely get off with greatly reduced payments, quite possibly with no 17.9% interest accumulation while not in default of the agreement. I know one lady who got off with 25 bucks a month and no interest accumulation.

And even if that fails, and it goes to trial, just be up front with the trial judge about your capacity to pay (very, very important) and I can almost promise you the terms he/she will give you will be far gentler than anything you will get from the miserable collection agency collection agencies.

Ray " END QUOTE

So Ray -

I have been in collections since October of this year - I actually got a phone call before I got a letter. They are calling me at work as I have no home phone at the moment (I am staying with relatives).

I am sending them (today) some post-dated cheques from now till April to hopefully keep them at bay. I have also requested that they contact me in writing only.

Since I have not real material assets, what are my risks at this point?

What should I be doing next?

Note they are still calling me and threatening legal action. They also refered to my current job as a "Joke". So I hung up on them.

Any help is always apprciated.

The SOL period refers to when a statement of claim is filed in court, not the actual trial date. Obviously, the debt buyer purchases the same rights with the debt that the original holder had. So, unfortunately, yes, you have to try and defend yourself as best as you can. To deliberately ignore a pending court action would be foolish in the extreme.

Ray

Can anyone answer this question? We know that SOL previous to 2004 was six years. If a debt purchaser has taken a debtor to court three months before the SOL period is over but the actual trial date is not tried until the SOL period is over, does the plaintiff still have a claim if nothing has been admitted by the defendant?

Yes, oh perplexed one and seeker of truth, thou art correct. The collection agency, if they buy the debt, now becomes the creditor and will try to exact their "pound of flesh" from the courts if it's praticable to do so.

A default judgement will last for 20 years and a writ will last at least 6 years unless it's renewed in which case it will last as long as the judgement.

Unless "Average Joe" is considerably less than average; ie, a complete derelict and living in the missions or off a disablity Government pension, the collection agencies will try to seize any income, assets or properety he has. However, "Average Joe claims to own a house (or at least have some equity in one) and owe, in his words, over $100,000 to 12 different creditors, all of whom have accepted 10 cents on the dollar.

Well, Pinocchio, not if you own a house or have a job.

Ray