🚀 go-pugleaf

what you dissapointed that you don't know more than me?

*Arrogance to bliss... there's nothing better than being right :)

People dislike debt collectors because they the power to make lives a bit
easier or harder for people in certain circumstances.  If they want to they
can decide to be nice and allow people to pay back a debt in smaller
instalments, or not.

I don't think this compares to the dislike of lawyers that generally forms
in people who suffer in their lives as a result of a lawyer lying or being
deceptive.




"meow" <meow4easthills@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1134552887.918652.7430@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Hey all,
>
> I was just wondering why debt collectors are so despised?
> I work for a mercantile (debt collection) agency and have so for about
> 1.5yrs and I was wondering why debt collectors are so despised, I mean
> in a very small percentage of cases I can understand, in that the
> debtor may has passed on/bankrupt/already paid/dispute. But for the
> rest I really can't understand.
>
> For example, often debtors become agitated when they say they will make
> a payment, then don't (which is quite often) and then when we call they
> become aggressive? and they get even more pissed off when they do it
> mulitple times and we call again?
> Also when skip-tracing (attempting to locate someone who has
> 'disappeared') when several attempts have been made to the debtor
> without reply, we call the family asking for them to contact and the
> debtor gets pissed off when we have called the family and there was no
> other form of contact?
> And we must not forget the 'harrasment' claim, I have called someone
> twice in one week and they said I was harrasing them?
> And in general just alot of debtors (not all) general attitude towards
> debt collectors when trying to ascertain a payment, I mean, the debtor
> made the debt not the debt collector.
>
> But in the end the main point is THE DEBTOR DIDN'T PAY THEIR BILL,
> THEREFORE THEY SHOULD BE CONTACTED AND ASKED FOR PAYMENT! DOES THAT
> SEEM FAIR? most of us pay our bills why shouldn't debtors?
>

meow wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> I was just wondering why debt collectors are so despised?

Probably cos you are the kind of people who can't get a job cleaning
toilet bocks or charity collecting in Martin Place.

Still, didn't stop me making a packet from shares in Credit Corp :) and
using it to repay the money I owed them. Nothing like making a debt
collector execute a process against their own share register!

Lol, funny thing is though most of them have probably had more
education than yourself, although I imagine that you probably have had
much. Why do I say that? You say "You made a 'packet' from shares in
creditcorp then used it to pay them back... well think about how much
they paid for the debts that you had with them probably 10-20 cents in
a Dollar, so they probably made a packet from you. Nothing like a idiot
who think's he made money off someone else when they actually made more
money from him!

On 14 Dec 2005 01:34:47 -0800, meow wrote:

> I work for a mercantile (debt collection) agency

Well that explains your crap in aus.tv.

I don't think it's the companies problem that you can't control your
spending
*brilliant idea - if you can't afford it, don't use it!

It's called debt purchase - the creditor purchases the debt for a
discount (eg a $5000 viacard debt might only be purchased fro $2000) if
the debtor then pays $4000 the company has made a $2000 profit

i only have 3 words for debt collectors.

" off my property"

"meow" <meow4easthills@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1134552887.918652.7430@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Hey all,
>
> I was just wondering why debt collectors are so despised?
> I work for a mercantile (debt collection) agency and have so for about
> 1.5yrs and I was wondering why debt collectors are so despised, I mean
> in a very small percentage of cases I can understand, in that the
> debtor may has passed on/bankrupt/already paid/dispute. But for the
> rest I really can't understand.
>
> For example, often debtors become agitated when they say they will make
> a payment, then don't (which is quite often) and then when we call they
> become aggressive? and they get even more pissed off when they do it
> mulitple times and we call again?
> Also when skip-tracing (attempting to locate someone who has
> 'disappeared') when several attempts have been made to the debtor
> without reply, we call the family asking for them to contact and the
> debtor gets pissed off when we have called the family and there was no
> other form of contact?
> And we must not forget the 'harrasment' claim, I have called someone
> twice in one week and they said I was harrasing them?
> And in general just alot of debtors (not all) general attitude towards
> debt collectors when trying to ascertain a payment, I mean, the debtor
> made the debt not the debt collector.
>
> But in the end the main point is THE DEBTOR DIDN'T PAY THEIR BILL,
> THEREFORE THEY SHOULD BE CONTACTED AND ASKED FOR PAYMENT! DOES THAT
> SEEM FAIR? most of us pay our bills why shouldn't debtors?
>

"You were harassing them."

Harrasment under the ACCC debt collection guide lines is considered
more that 3 unsolicited calls in one week and more than 10 in a month,
2 in one week is not considered harrasment.

"The debtor may have made the debt, but 99% of the time it was not
their
fault they cant pay.  Your calls are only reminding them that they are
in
financial difficulty."

What about the 40-50% of debtors that can pay a large some off, but
don't want to?
Are you telling me that out of the probably million people in Australia
that have approx 980 000 are in financial hardship?
So do these 980 000 people fell into debt after they get the credit or
before they have the credit

ok...it's very basic maths. If a collection agency buys an account off
a creditor say the account is for $5000, the collection agency buys it
for $2000, now say the debtor pays $4900 of that bill. the agency has
therefore made $2900.. This is why debt purchase/factoring/collection
agencies exist, because they by the accounts at a discounted rates and
the debtor pays off the whole or large sum of the account...

it's an amazingly simple concept, buy something for $2000 someone pays
$4000. You have made $2000 gross profit

The debt collecting companys uses fear and threats to force people to
pay
more than they can afford.

Is it unreasonable to demand for an account that is 4yrs afterdue? is
it unreasonable to advise of legal action pending?

When someone tells you "You have the wrong number" or "I don't owe
anyone
money".  Do you delete the incorrect phone number, or do you call them
a
liar and ring them again the follow day?

You seem to have misinterpreted what I have said, I said what if there
is a ligimate excuse for the debt not if someone says I don't have a
number. When someone says I don't owe the money, as you know the onus
is the collector to prove the debt is there, but if their name, dob,
address, drivers licence is on the account, it would be quite hard to
get out of, fraud isnt extremely common so how did someone get all
those details of you. And what about the bills, I've heard many people
say it's not their account even when they confirmed the address the
bills they were sent to. What did they do with the bills?

Would you be angry if you didn't have any money, but someone kept
ringing
you asking you to pay money?

what about accounts that are four years old, we call them 2 times a
month for 2yrs and they continually say they don't have money, is it
possible that you could have saved even a little bit in that time? how
about sending in an statement of income proving this?

Their family are INNOCENT.  They don't own the debt collector any
money, so
why annoy them with unwanted phone calls?

I am talking about when the debtor doesnt reply to corrospodence, the
parents are only point of contact, they either, say they will pass on
the message, or say they don't know where they are. And in most cases
where parents say they have no contact with debtor, the debtor will say
they do??

meow wrote:

> Hey all,
>
> I was just wondering why debt collectors are so despised?
> I work for a mercantile

Hold it right there - 'mercantile' adj 1. of trade, trading. 2. commercial.

Seems like debt collecting and reporting companies want some euphemism to
describe a trade on the same level as used car dealers.

Collecting fro deadbeats is one thing.

Dunning alleged debtors when there is a genuine dispute over the contract in
question is another.

A third area of concern is where the debt was incurred by unfair and
inappropriate sales techniques.

For example a door to door computer sales company got Baycorp to go after a
family, even though the company had sold them a second hand computer, when
the sales pitch indicated that it was a new one.

"meow" <meow4easthills@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1134613127.294311.129500@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Lol, funny thing is though most of them have probably had more
> education than yourself, although I imagine that you probably have had
> much. Why do I say that? You say "You made a 'packet' from shares in
> creditcorp then used it to pay them back... well think about how much
> they paid for the debts that you had with them probably 10-20 cents in
> a Dollar, so they probably made a packet from you.


Are you presuming there was interest paid on the debt, at more than a 10-20%
rate?   Only this way could the debt collector be 'making money' off the
debtor.



 Nothing like a idiot
> who think's he made money off someone else when they actually made more
> money from him!
>

"meow" <meow4easthills@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1134620730.834648.272940@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> It's called debt purchase - the creditor purchases the debt for a
> discount (eg a $5000 viacard debt might only be purchased fro $2000) if
> the debtor then pays $4000 the company has made a $2000 profit
>

Yes, but this doesn't explain how the collector makes money 'off the
debtor', as you suggested.  This would only happen if interest is paid to
the collector.

"ManWhore" <slut@heart> wrote in message
news:11q1ud0mqaq6t68@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "Jeffry" <no-one@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:IV5of.1148$V7.544@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>
>> "meow" <meow4easthills@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1134613127.294311.129500@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>> Lol, funny thing is though most of them have probably had more
>>> education than yourself, although I imagine that you probably have had
>>> much. Why do I say that? You say "You made a 'packet' from shares in
>>> creditcorp then used it to pay them back... well think about how much
>>> they paid for the debts that you had with them probably 10-20 cents in
>>> a Dollar, so they probably made a packet from you.
>>
>>
>> Are you presuming there was interest paid on the debt, at more than a
>> 10-20% rate?   Only this way could the debt collector be 'making money'
>> off the debtor.
>
>
> Does it really cost $50-$100 to send someone a basic reminder letter?
>
> Now, tell me again that you are not making a profit.
>

Yeah, they are making a profit..

But they are not "making money off the debtor" if there is no interest paid
to the collector, because the debtor is simply paying off the debt that he
always had.  The collector is making serious money off the original
creditor, who can't be bothered collecting the money himself or taking it to
court...




> A new girl a'day keeps the marriage away.
>
>
>
>

Do you collect debts for video stores?

I have a $50 fine at one that was incurred in 1999 and they still won't let
me borrow from it.





"meow" <meow4easthills@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1134641175.291670.193610@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> The debt collecting companys uses fear and threats to force people to
> pay
> more than they can afford.
>
> Is it unreasonable to demand for an account that is 4yrs afterdue? is
> it unreasonable to advise of legal action pending?
>
> When someone tells you "You have the wrong number" or "I don't owe
> anyone
> money".  Do you delete the incorrect phone number, or do you call them
> a
> liar and ring them again the follow day?
>
> You seem to have misinterpreted what I have said, I said what if there
> is a ligimate excuse for the debt not if someone says I don't have a
> number. When someone says I don't owe the money, as you know the onus
> is the collector to prove the debt is there, but if their name, dob,
> address, drivers licence is on the account, it would be quite hard to
> get out of, fraud isnt extremely common so how did someone get all
> those details of you. And what about the bills, I've heard many people
> say it's not their account even when they confirmed the address the
> bills they were sent to. What did they do with the bills?
>
> Would you be angry if you didn't have any money, but someone kept
> ringing
> you asking you to pay money?
>
> what about accounts that are four years old, we call them 2 times a
> month for 2yrs and they continually say they don't have money, is it
> possible that you could have saved even a little bit in that time? how
> about sending in an statement of income proving this?
>
> Their family are INNOCENT.  They don't own the debt collector any
> money, so
> why annoy them with unwanted phone calls?
>
> I am talking about when the debtor doesnt reply to corrospodence, the
> parents are only point of contact, they either, say they will pass on
> the message, or say they don't know where they are. And in most cases
> where parents say they have no contact with debtor, the debtor will say
> they do??
>

On 14 Dec 2005 01:34:47 -0800, "meow" <meow4easthills@hotmail.com>
wrote:

> we call the family asking for them to contact and the
>debtor gets pissed off when we have called the family and there was no
>other form of contact?

"Dont tell your work mates this little trick as it  is a secret."

They disappear because they dont want to be found.

"Bur keep this under your hat ok. "



>And we must not forget the 'harrasment' claim, I have called someone

I love the way you lot get all high and mighty with threats and
intimidation yet when the person does the same back to you,  you lot
run away and cry hard done by.
Shit much as  your are doing here.

>But in the end the main point is THE DEBTOR DIDN'T PAY THEIR BILL,
>THEREFORE THEY SHOULD BE CONTACTED AND ASKED FOR PAYMENT! DOES THAT
>SEEM FAIR? most of us pay our bills why shouldn't debtors?

Maybe business should be a lot less willing to hand out cash and goods
to people unless they know they can pay.

They just make it so easy.

EG:
Get a small credit card ($500) and before you know it a letter arrives
telling you you need to have a higher credit limit. Try $1,000.
With in a year a new letter.  Try $5,000 and so it goes.
Just sign the form and return it they say.

A guy called me over a few hundred dollars owing to the phone company.

I was put in my place.
If I don't pay NOW he will cut me off.

I said fine cut the phone off. You do realise that I get and then pay
my phone bills on line.  If you cut me off how can I get bills and pay
them.

This cause him a mental break down.  He hung up on me.
God bless him.  the poor man.

Bye  .. .. ..

meow wrote:

> Also when skip-tracing (attempting to locate someone who has
> 'disappeared') when several attempts have been made to the debtor
> without reply, we call the family asking for them to contact and the
> debtor gets pissed off when we have called the family and there was no
> other form of contact?

It's not the family's problem that you can't contact the debtor.

> And we must not forget the 'harrasment' claim, I have called someone
> twice in one week and they said I was harrasing them?

It's their telephone line, not yours. It's doubtful that they want you
to use it to pester them, any more than they have to accept your going
to their house against their wishes.

Write letters.

> And in general just alot of debtors (not all) general attitude towards
> debt collectors when trying to ascertain a payment, I mean, the debtor
> made the debt not the debt collector.
>
> But in the end the main point is THE DEBTOR DIDN'T PAY THEIR BILL,
> THEREFORE THEY SHOULD BE CONTACTED AND ASKED FOR PAYMENT! DOES THAT
> SEEM FAIR? most of us pay our bills why shouldn't debtors?

There are court processes for recovering debts. You should use them, if
they're worthwhile. If they're not, then write off the debt. Pestering
the debtor (and their family) is not a reasonable alternative.

Sylvia.

> I was just wondering why debt collectors are so despised?

Because they threton and harass innocent people. (see below examples)

The debt collecting companys uses fear and threats to force people to pay
more than they can afford.


> I work for a mercantile (debt collection) agency and have so for about
> 1.5yrs and I was wondering why debt collectors are so despised, I mean
> in a very small percentage of cases I can understand, in that the
> debtor may has passed on/bankrupt/already paid/dispute. But for the
> rest I really can't understand.

When someone tells you "You have the wrong number" or "I don't owe anyone
money".  Do you delete the incorrect phone number, or do you call them a
liar and ring them again the follow day?

I had a debt collector after me because I had someone else's old number.
They called my every day.  Every day I told them it was the wrong person.
They only stopped calling when I abused the hell out of them down the phone.
You should look at your own behaviour to find out why people don't like you.


> For example, often debtors become agitated when they say they will make
> a payment, then don't (which is quite often) and then when we call they
> become aggressive? and they get even more pissed off when they do it
> mulitple times and we call again?

Debt collectors always ask for large repayment instalments.  They always say
they can not accept smaller instalments.  They always pressure the person
into agreeing to pay more than they can afford.  No surprise the people are
not able to honour the repayment schedule.  Then they have another
debt-collector calling them on a phone demanding yet another large repayment
plan.

Would you be angry if you didn't have any money, but someone kept ringing
you asking you to pay money?


> Also when skip-tracing (attempting to locate someone who has
> 'disappeared') when several attempts have been made to the debtor
> without reply, we call the family asking for them to contact and the
> debtor gets pissed off when we have called the family and there was no
> other form of contact?

Their family are INNOCENT.  They don't own the debt collector any money, so
why annoy them with unwanted phone calls?

The family will call the debtor and complain about getting your calls, and
the debtor will tell you to f-ck off.  The debtor is correct, you should not
be calling their family.


> And we must not forget the 'harrasment' claim, I have called someone
> twice in one week and they said I was harrasing them?

You were harassing them.


> And in general just alot of debtors (not all) general attitude towards
> debt collectors when trying to ascertain a payment, I mean, the debtor
> made the debt not the debt collector.

The debtor may have made the debt, but 99% of the time it was not their
fault they cant pay.  Your calls are only reminding them that they are in
financial difficulty.


> But in the end the main point is THE DEBTOR DIDN'T PAY THEIR BILL,
> THEREFORE THEY SHOULD BE CONTACTED AND ASKED FOR PAYMENT! DOES THAT
> SEEM FAIR? most of us pay our bills why shouldn't debtors?

Really?  So what would you say about a $600+ debt to a collection agency who
was sold a $6 late fee from a video rental?  Is that fair on the debtor?
Was the debt collector acting responsibly when they added a 600% fee to the
initial debt?



--
A new girl a'day keeps the marriage away.

"Jeffry" <no-one@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:IV5of.1148$V7.544@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> "meow" <meow4easthills@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1134613127.294311.129500@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> Lol, funny thing is though most of them have probably had more
>> education than yourself, although I imagine that you probably have had
>> much. Why do I say that? You say "You made a 'packet' from shares in
>> creditcorp then used it to pay them back... well think about how much
>> they paid for the debts that you had with them probably 10-20 cents in
>> a Dollar, so they probably made a packet from you.
>
>
> Are you presuming there was interest paid on the debt, at more than a
> 10-20% rate?   Only this way could the debt collector be 'making money'
> off the debtor.


Does it really cost $50-$100 to send someone a basic reminder letter?

Now, tell me again that you are not making a profit.

--
A new girl a'day keeps the marriage away.

It's their telephone line, not yours. It's doubtful that they want you
to use it to pester them, any more than they have to accept your going
to their house against their wishes.

The money they borrowed isn't theirs either....

Write letters.

We generally get little to no reply from written correspondence.

There are court processes for recovering debts. You should use them, if

they're worthwhile. If they're not, then write off the debt. Pestering
the debtor (and their family) is not a reasonable alternative.

Yeah what about the $350+ legal fees that we add onto the debt, not
many people are happy about legal action occuring without their
knowledge...

No quite easy infact

meow wrote:

You seem unable to respond to my posting. Too hard?

Sylvia.

"Peter" <peterwn@parazzdise.net.nz> wrote in message

> For example a door to door computer sales company got Baycorp to go
> after a family,

Baycorp don't "go after" anyone.


--
Kwyj

On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 22:09:54 +1100, Sylvia Else wrote:

> meow wrote:
>
> You seem unable to respond to my posting. Too hard?

Perhaps meow is of the opinion that your posting is not worth responding
to.

Now he or she will feel obligated to reply, as a matter of good manners.

On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 22:56:18 +1100, Kwyjibo wrote:

> "Peter" <peterwn@parazzdise.net.nz> wrote in message
>
>> For example a door to door computer sales company got Baycorp to go
>> after a family,
>
> Baycorp don't "go after" anyone.

Isn't Baycorp now a debt collector as well as a credit reporting agency?

I'm pretty sure that's why they changed its name to Baycorp from the CRAA.

"meow" <meow4easthills@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1134552887.918652.7430@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Hey all,

Hi Paul.
>
> I was just wondering why debt collectors are so despised?
> I work for a mercantile (debt collection) agency and have so for about
> 1.5yrs and I was wondering why debt collectors are so despised, I mean
> in a very small percentage of cases I can understand, in that the
> debtor may has passed on/bankrupt/already paid/dispute. But for the
> rest I really can't understand.
>
> For example, often debtors become agitated when they say they will make
> a payment, then don't (which is quite often) and then when we call they
> become aggressive? and they get even more pissed off when they do it
> mulitple times and we call again?
> Also when skip-tracing (attempting to locate someone who has
> 'disappeared') when several attempts have been made to the debtor
> without reply, we call the family asking for them to contact and the
> debtor gets pissed off when we have called the family and there was no
> other form of contact?
> And we must not forget the 'harrasment' claim, I have called someone
> twice in one week and they said I was harrasing them?
> And in general just alot of debtors (not all) general attitude towards
> debt collectors when trying to ascertain a payment, I mean, the debtor
> made the debt not the debt collector.
>
> But in the end the main point is THE DEBTOR DIDN'T PAY THEIR BILL,
> THEREFORE THEY SHOULD BE CONTACTED AND ASKED FOR PAYMENT! DOES THAT
> SEEM FAIR? most of us pay our bills why shouldn't debtors?
>

<a> wrote in message news:43a25e76@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>> Isn't Baycorp now a debt collector as well as a credit reporting agency?
>
> Nope. Just a credit listing company. All they do is keep track of who owes
> who, what. Any so-called "mistakes" on their listings are
> not of their own making, either - it's always the company that you owe
> money *to* that makes the erroneous listing. Like on Today
> Tonight last night, where the story incorrectly stated that "Baycorp
> listed the customer" - that's a blatant lie; the other company
> did. And the same story featured the old guy saying that the bad credit
> rating is there for life - another blatant lie - it's there
> for no longer than 5 years in most cases (up to 7 for other matters). Good
> ol' Channel Seven fucking up the facts again!

Naomi is cute tho.

>
>
>

The face is nothing to get excited about, either way - but her voice!  Puts my
nerves on edge - surely there is someone with a pleasant voice they could hire

David

Spork wrote:

> >
> > Naomi is cute tho.
>
> No she isn't.  You could sharpen an axe with her face.

But surely Baycorp has to use 'due diligence' to make sure the debt is actually owed?  They would have to have proof of the debt befoer
listing it, otherwise they must be liable for any loss of reputation the socalled debtor suffers

David

a wrote:

> > Isn't Baycorp now a debt collector as well as a credit reporting agency?
>
> Nope. Just a credit listing company. All they do is keep track of who owes who, what. Any so-called "mistakes" on their listings are
> not of their own making, either - it's always the company that you owe money *to* that makes the erroneous listing. Like on Today
> Tonight last night, where the story incorrectly stated that "Baycorp listed the customer" - that's a blatant lie; the other company
> did. And the same story featured the old guy saying that the bad credit rating is there for life - another blatant lie - it's there
> for no longer than 5 years in most cases (up to 7 for other matters). Good ol' Channel Seven fucking up the facts again!

"meow" <meow4easthills@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1134641175.291670.193610@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> The debt collecting companys uses fear and threats to force people to
> pay
> more than they can afford.
>
> Is it unreasonable to demand for an account that is 4yrs afterdue?

Yes, after all its four years overdue.


>is
> it unreasonable to advise of legal action pending?
>


Depends, how many times and at what cost?



> When someone tells you "You have the wrong number" or "I don't owe
> anyone
> money".  Do you delete the incorrect phone number, or do you call them
> a
> liar and ring them again the follow day?
>
> You seem to have misinterpreted what I have said, I said what if there
> is a ligimate excuse for the debt not if someone says I don't have a
> number. When someone says I don't owe the money, as you know the onus
> is the collector to prove the debt is there, but if their name, dob,
> address, drivers licence is on the account, it would be quite hard to
> get out of, fraud isnt extremely common so how did someone get all
> those details of you. And what about the bills, I've heard many people
> say it's not their account even when they confirmed the address the
> bills they were sent to. What did they do with the bills?
>

Once personal details such as name, dob, address and drivers licence numbers
are used by businesses for identification purposes then they are no longer
personal. Maybe the 16 year old copied the database at the local video shop
before moving on and then 3 years later while ruining his life he decides to
use this information. None of the details you have mentioned change
throughout your life except your address.


> Would you be angry if you didn't have any money, but someone kept
> ringing
> you asking you to pay money?
>
> what about accounts that are four years old, we call them 2 times a
> month for 2yrs and they continually say they don't have money, is it
> possible that you could have saved even a little bit in that time? how
> about sending in an statement of income proving this?
>


Why do you keep on calling them? Obviosly they have no intention of paying.
Are they required to send you a statement of income by law?



> Their family are INNOCENT.  They don't own the debt collector any
> money, so
> why annoy them with unwanted phone calls?
>
> I am talking about when the debtor doesnt reply to corrospodence, the
> parents are only point of contact, they either, say they will pass on
> the message, or say they don't know where they are. And in most cases
> where parents say they have no contact with debtor, the debtor will say
> they do??
>

WTF??

meow wrote:

> It's their telephone line, not yours. It's doubtful that they want you
> to use it to pester them, any more than they have to accept your going
> to their house against their wishes.
>
> The money they borrowed isn't theirs either....

Your point being? Are you suggesting that because they reneged on a
contract to pay the amount owed (which wasn't with you anyway), that you
should be entitled to appropriate to your own use part of the capacity
of their telephone line, thus depriving them of its use for other purposes?

>
> Write letters.
>
> We generally get little to no reply from written correspondence.

I don't doubt it.
>
> There are court processes for recovering debts. You should use them, if
>
> they're worthwhile. If they're not, then write off the debt. Pestering
> the debtor (and their family) is not a reasonable alternative.
>
> Yeah what about the $350+ legal fees that we add onto the debt, not
> many people are happy about legal action occuring without their
> knowledge...
>

You send them one (1) letter by registered post informing them that if
they don't pay within a certain time you will start legal proceedings.
Then you either write the debt off, or start the proceedings.

Pestering them about it because you're not prepared to go to court is
unreasonable.

Sylvia.

meow wrote:

> No quite easy infact
>

If it was so easy, why did you do so badly?

Sylvia.

> Isn't Baycorp now a debt collector as well as a credit reporting agency?

Nope. Just a credit listing company. All they do is keep track of who owes who, what. Any so-called "mistakes" on their listings are
not of their own making, either - it's always the company that you owe money *to* that makes the erroneous listing. Like on Today
Tonight last night, where the story incorrectly stated that "Baycorp listed the customer" - that's a blatant lie; the other company
did. And the same story featured the old guy saying that the bad credit rating is there for life - another blatant lie - it's there
for no longer than 5 years in most cases (up to 7 for other matters). Good ol' Channel Seven fucking up the facts again!

> > I was just wondering why debt collectors are so despised?
>
> Because they threton and harass innocent people. (see below examples)

Then blame the company that hires them to chase the money - not the collector.

> The debt collecting companys uses fear and threats to force people to pay
> more than they can afford.

LOL, more than they can afford? Consider this: I see hundreds of accounts per day where no payments have been made on a phone bill
for over half a year, yet they continue to rack up $300-400 in calls on that phone every month! Then the phone company cuts it off
and the debtor cries poor when asked to start paying it. Thank god for Baycorp and bad credit listings!

Another few quick examples regarding "more than they can afford":

* I've got too many other bills (this is a fucking bill too, dipshit!).
* I've got to buy my kids Christmas presents (they can do without this year).
* I'm only on Centrelink (boo hoo - most Centrelink debtors pay us $40/fortnight).
* Etc etc etc

> Would you be angry if you didn't have any money, but someone kept ringing
> you asking you to pay money?

I wouldn't be so stupid as to get into debt in the first place.

> Their family are INNOCENT.  They don't own the debt collector any money, so
> why annoy them with unwanted phone calls?

In most cases the phone number given by the debtor is for a family number, so it's natural to call it. And due to the Privacy Act,
we cannot remove that number unless the debtor themselves authorizes it. So let the family get the shits - maybe they'll get the
debtor to fucking call!

> > And we must not forget the 'harrasment' claim, I have called someone
> > twice in one week and they said I was harrasing them?
>
> You were harassing them.

It's not against legislation to call twice in one week.

> The debtor may have made the debt, but 99% of the time it was not their
> fault they cant pay.

Wrong. Unless you're a collector, shut up. You don't know the facts. 99% of the time they just stop paying because they think they
can. Some examples:

* I've been overseas for two months (wow, they can afford a holiday but not pay their bill?).
* I thought it was paid ages ago (ignorance is not an excuse in the eyes of the law).
* The phone got stolen (too bad, you're on a contract, dickhead).
* My friend is supposed to be paying it (so what, it's in your name).

> So what would you say about a $600+ debt to a collection agency who
> was sold a $6 late fee from a video rental?  Is that fair on the debtor?
> Was the debt collector acting responsibly when they added a 600% fee to the
> initial debt?

Such a situation simply doesn't occur - stop spreading fantasy.

On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 17:28:41 +1100, a wrote:

>> Isn't Baycorp now a debt collector as well as a credit reporting agency?
>
> Nope. Just a credit listing company. All they do is keep track of who
> owes who, what. Any so-called "mistakes" on their listings are
> not of their own making, either - it's always the company that you
> owe money *to* that makes the erroneous listing. Like on Today
> Tonight last night, where the story incorrectly stated that "Baycorp
> listed the customer" - that's a blatant lie; the other company
> did. And the same story featured the old guy saying that the bad credit
> rating is there for life - another blatant lie - it's there
> for no longer than 5 years in most cases (up to 7 for other matters).
> Good ol' Channel Seven fucking up the facts again!

They certainly do more than just credit listing.

It may be in conjunction with other companies though (Baycorp's "Agents").

>From the Baycorp site:

Fraud Investigation, Location & Field Services

With direct access to a national network of agents, we combine the latest
information databases and location software. Baycorp Advantage improves
your ability to locate debtors and recover assets. We have a highly
successful rate of contact, enabling our Trans -Tasman field services team
to take further action if appropriate. Our state-of-the-art internet-based
system allows for the immediate update of your debtors¢ financial and
personal circumstances, thereby allowing our agents to recover debt more
efficiently.

Through the Field Services team we provide direct access to a network of
Field Agents and Process Servers across Australia and New Zealand. This
team of licensed professionals are available to conduct:

Field calls
Process serving
Repossession¢s
Lock outs
Factual investigations
Specialised skip tracing
Hot Card (Pick ups)
Fraud Investigations
All Services under the Commercial Agents & Private Inquiry Agents Acts

To find out more
For more information on how our products and services can liberate the
potential of your business, call us on freephone 13 31 24 or email us at
sales.au@baycorpadvantage.com

"Zappy" <zapkvr@ncable.net.au> wrote in message
news:43a261c8$1@news.comindico.com.au...
>
> <a> wrote in message news:43a25e76@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
> >> Isn't Baycorp now a debt collector as well as a credit reporting
agency?
> >
> > Nope. Just a credit listing company. All they do is keep track of who
owes
> > who, what. Any so-called "mistakes" on their listings are
> > not of their own making, either - it's always the company that you owe
> > money *to* that makes the erroneous listing. Like on Today
> > Tonight last night, where the story incorrectly stated that "Baycorp
> > listed the customer" - that's a blatant lie; the other company
> > did. And the same story featured the old guy saying that the bad credit
> > rating is there for life - another blatant lie - it's there
> > for no longer than 5 years in most cases (up to 7 for other matters).
Good
> > ol' Channel Seven fucking up the facts again!
>
> Naomi is cute tho.

No she isn't.  You could sharpen an axe with her face.

On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 19:29:48 +1100, Kwyjibo wrote:

> "Horace Wachope ." <horacewachope@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:fwohnd45qxnw.152al08w3y1o3.dlg@40tude.net
>> On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 17:28:41 +1100, a wrote:
>>
>>>> Isn't Baycorp now a debt collector as well as a credit reporting
>>>> agency?
>>>
>>> Nope. Just a credit listing company. All they do is keep track of who
>>> owes who, what. Any so-called "mistakes" on their listings are
>>> not of their own making, either - it's always the company that you
>>> owe money *to* that makes the erroneous listing. Like on Today
>>> Tonight last night, where the story incorrectly stated that "Baycorp
>>> listed the customer" - that's a blatant lie; the other company
>>> did. And the same story featured the old guy saying that the bad
>>> credit rating is there for life - another blatant lie - it's there
>>> for no longer than 5 years in most cases (up to 7 for other matters).
>>> Good ol' Channel Seven fucking up the facts again!
>>
>> They certainly do more than just credit listing.
>>
>
> Ignore my recent post. You obviously found the info yourself.

I didn't see your recent post.  I have you killfiled.

"Horace Wachope ." <horacewachope@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:6bxtgtcusc3s$.1kjnhr5ijuc6k$.dlg@40tude.net
> On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 22:56:18 +1100, Kwyjibo wrote:
>
>> "Peter" <peterwn@parazzdise.net.nz> wrote in message
>>
>>> For example a door to door computer sales company got Baycorp to go
>>> after a family,
>>
>> Baycorp don't "go after" anyone.
>
> Isn't Baycorp now a debt collector as well as a credit reporting
> agency?

Nope.

They don't do any collections themselves. They specialise in information
gathering/warehousing and sell access to that information in various
products. These include credit checks of various levels, fraud checks,
identity theft checks etc.


>
> I'm pretty sure that's why they changed its name to Baycorp from the
> CRAA.


Nope.

--
Kwyj

"Horace Wachope ." <horacewachope@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:fwohnd45qxnw.152al08w3y1o3.dlg@40tude.net
> On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 17:28:41 +1100, a wrote:
>
>>> Isn't Baycorp now a debt collector as well as a credit reporting
>>> agency?
>>
>> Nope. Just a credit listing company. All they do is keep track of who
>> owes who, what. Any so-called "mistakes" on their listings are
>> not of their own making, either - it's always the company that you
>> owe money *to* that makes the erroneous listing. Like on Today
>> Tonight last night, where the story incorrectly stated that "Baycorp
>> listed the customer" - that's a blatant lie; the other company
>> did. And the same story featured the old guy saying that the bad
>> credit rating is there for life - another blatant lie - it's there
>> for no longer than 5 years in most cases (up to 7 for other matters).
>> Good ol' Channel Seven fucking up the facts again!
>
> They certainly do more than just credit listing.
>

Ignore my recent post. You obviously found the info yourself.

--
Kwyj

On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 19:22:37 +1100, Kwyjibo wrote:

> "Horace Wachope ." <horacewachope@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:6bxtgtcusc3s$.1kjnhr5ijuc6k$.dlg@40tude.net
>> On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 22:56:18 +1100, Kwyjibo wrote:
>>
>>> "Peter" <peterwn@parazzdise.net.nz> wrote in message
>>>
>>>> For example a door to door computer sales company got Baycorp to go
>>>> after a family,
>>>
>>> Baycorp don't "go after" anyone.
>>
>> Isn't Baycorp now a debt collector as well as a credit reporting
>> agency?
>
> Nope.
>
> They don't do any collections themselves. They specialise in information
> gathering/warehousing and sell access to that information in various
> products. These include credit checks of various levels, fraud checks,
> identity theft checks etc.

Doesn't this conflict with what I posted from the Baycorp site?

In particular:

Through the Field Services team we provide direct access to a network of
Field Agents and Process Servers across Australia and New Zealand. This
team of licensed professionals are available to conduct:

Field calls
Process serving
Repossession¢s
Lock outs
Factual investigations
Specialised skip tracing
Hot Card (Pick ups)
Fraud Investigations
All Services under the Commercial Agents & Private Inquiry Agents Acts


It doesn't read as though Baycorp is simply providing a referral service.
It rather appears that Baycorp is conducting its own debt collection
business by using contracted agents.

The Baycorp website is fairly confusing, though.

>> I'm pretty sure that's why they changed its name to Baycorp from the
>> CRAA.
>
>
> Nope.

See above.

On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 21:44:42 +1100, Jim Jones wrote:

> "Horace Wachope ." <horacewachope@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>
>>>
>>> Ignore my recent post. You obviously found the info yourself.
>>
>> I didn't see your recent post.  I have you killfiled.
>
> Then how did you see this post?

Because I don't have you killfiled, only Kwyjibo.

"Horace Wachope ." <horacewachope@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>
>>
>> Ignore my recent post. You obviously found the info yourself.
>
> I didn't see your recent post.  I have you killfiled.

Then how did you see this post?

Jim Jones wrote:
> "Horace Wachope ." <horacewachope@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>
>
>>>Ignore my recent post. You obviously found the info yourself.
>>
>>I didn't see your recent post.  I have you killfiled.
>
>
> Then how did you see this post?
>
>

Hey Rev

You just posted it, how can you be sure it has appeared on his screen yet

On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 21:44:42 +1100, Jim Jones wrote:

>
> "Horace Wachope ." <horacewachope@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>
>>>
>>> Ignore my recent post. You obviously found the info yourself.
>>
>> I didn't see your recent post.  I have you killfiled.
>
> Then how did you see this post?

By looking at the monitor, fuckwit.

On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 17:51:24 +1100, <a> wrote:


>In most cases the phone number given by the debtor is for a family number, so it's natural to call it.
In other words it was the custome not the phone owner.
I bet this belief would change if he was the one receiving calls.

>And due to the Privacy Act,
>we cannot remove that number unless the debtor themselves authorizes it.
Crap.  Just dont ring it.

>o let the family get the shits - maybe they'll get the
>debtor to fucking call!
Just like junk mail and spam.
Do it enough and they may buy.

>Wrong. Unless you're a collector, shut up. You don't know the facts.
What as a member of society are people now not alolowed to have an
opinion.
>

I contacted the Weekly Trading Post only to be told I owed them money.
I asked how much and what was it for.
It was a $6 late payment fee form 1983.
I said that is strange.  I must also owe  for a bill do I?
No she said there is no out standing.  All bills were paid on time.
Then how did I get a late payment fee?
She could offer no answer.

Sounds to me like the trading post have to do some work on account
keeping.  I guess I am lucky no collector came after my blood.
Although I would not be able to explain it to him.
I would have to say to the simple debt copllector.
Unless you're a fellow customer, shut up. You don't know the facts.

Bye .. .. ..

a wrote:
>>Isn't Baycorp now a debt collector as well as a credit reporting agency?
>
>
> Nope. Just a credit listing company. All they do is keep track of who owes who, what.

Wrong. Baycorp Advantage also act as collectors...

<URL:http://www.baycorpadvantage.com/your_customer_life_cycle/stage4/commercial_debt_recovery.asp?CountryID=1&UserTypeID=1>

Luke

Kwyjibo wrote:

> "Peter" <peterwn@parazzdise.net.nz> wrote in message
>
>> For example a door to door computer sales company got Baycorp to go
>> after a family,
>
> Baycorp don't "go after" anyone.
>
>
They do in New Zealand, and other postings here indicate they do in
Australia too, although apparently via subcontractors.

"Horace Wachope ." <horacewachope@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1rlykarb4tzow.1aqyunitpmq5f.dlg@40tude.net
> On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 19:22:37 +1100, Kwyjibo wrote:
>
>> "Horace Wachope ." <horacewachope@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:6bxtgtcusc3s$.1kjnhr5ijuc6k$.dlg@40tude.net
>>> On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 22:56:18 +1100, Kwyjibo wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Peter" <peterwn@parazzdise.net.nz> wrote in message
>>>>
>>>>> For example a door to door computer sales company got Baycorp to
>>>>> go after a family,
>>>>
>>>> Baycorp don't "go after" anyone.
>>>
>>> Isn't Baycorp now a debt collector as well as a credit reporting
>>> agency?
>>
>> Nope.
>>
>> They don't do any collections themselves. They specialise in
>> information gathering/warehousing and sell access to that
>> information in various products. These include credit checks of
>> various levels, fraud checks, identity theft checks etc.
>
> Doesn't this conflict with what I posted from the Baycorp site?
>
> In particular:
>
> Through the Field Services team we provide direct access to a network
> of Field Agents and Process Servers across Australia and New Zealand.
> This team of licensed professionals are available to conduct:
>
> Field calls
> Process serving
> Repossession¢s
> Lock outs
> Factual investigations
> Specialised skip tracing
> Hot Card (Pick ups)
> Fraud Investigations
> All Services under the Commercial Agents & Private Inquiry Agents Acts
>

Unless it something relatively new, it sounds like they are acting as an
agent for other subcontracted firms. The last direct dealing I had with them
was 2 years ago and they offered no such services at that stage.


>
> It doesn't read as though Baycorp is simply providing a referral
> service. It rather appears that Baycorp is conducting its own debt
> collection business by using contracted agents.
>
> The Baycorp website is fairly confusing, though.

Try negotiating a contract with them........

>
>>> I'm pretty sure that's why they changed its name to Baycorp from the
>>> CRAA.
>>
>>
>> Nope.
>
> See above.

I just did. I typed 'Nope'. Or were you referring to something above that?

--
Kwyj