Complaint Review: Cabela's - Lincoln Nebraska

I have no idea where you got the idea that they were required to follow it, but they don't. Original creditors can call you.

""Guess what? They called first thing this morning...for a third time in a day and a half. No note and no do not call placed on the record. I explained that I read the FDCPA and they were indeed listed as a creditor and could not call since I had sent them a written letter."" Your letter is meaningless to a creditor and has no backing of law behind it. Pretend I owe you $200 for that lawnmower I purchased last month at your garage sale. I bought it for $250 with $50 down and I still haven't paid you the balance of $200 that I owe you. You call me twice per week and I tell you to quit calling me. Do you think that if I write you letter saying you can't call me that if you do call me I can sue you? I could sue, but I wouldn't win. Further, you would countersue for the $200 plus court costs and most likely I would lose to you and have to pay the $200 plus your legal fees, filing fees, etc. No jurisdiction is going to stop a CREDITOR from attempting to collect. ""The woman replied that they have their own in house training and no from that training the FDCA does not apply to them. "" Correct. The FDCPA does not apply to them. Don't take my word for it. Visit the FTC website at www.ftc.gov and check for yourself. The FTC conducted a consumer credit workshop in 2007, the main topic was the FDCPA and collection activities. The report highlights the FACT that the restrictions imposed on debt collectors in the FDCPA DO NOT APPLY TO CREDITORS. You should tell your husband to deal with this. He could offer the creditor a settlement or payment plan to make HIS DEBT go away. (NOTE; do NOT settle with any debt collector-only the creditor.)

Spoke to Cabela's visa on the phone last night and the woman stated she would place a note on her report to not call for a few days till they recieved a permission slip to talk to me on my hubby's behalf. Guess what? They called first thing this morning...for a third time in a day and a half. No note and no do not call placed on the record. I explained that I read the FDCPA and they were indeed listed as a creditor and could not call since I had sent them a written letter. The woman replied that they have their own in house training and no from that training the FDCA does not apply to them. Needless tp say...I got an unlisted phone number the the FTC is investigating. Hope they get fined for the harassment.

""Not only have they broken the law, in accord to the act itself which I have read front to back but they actually think the act doesn't apply to them."" That is because they are correct, it doesn't apply to them. ""They called 2 times in one day after receiving the letter...with a partial payment! They stated on the second phone call: 'We are a 1st party creditor/collector and that doesn't apply to us. We have the right to call you and will continue to call you. We did receive your letter and that's why we are calling.' Nowhere in the act does it state in article 805 that ceasing communications only applies to 3rd part collection and the very fist page defines collectors as both 3rd party and original creditor. (1st party) "" IAW the FDCPA, the cease communication letter applies to DEBT COLLECTORS-they are CREDITORS. This is defined in Section 803: (4) The term creditor means any person who offers or extends credit creating a debt or to whom a debt is owed, but such term does not include any person to the extent that he receives an assignment or transfer of a debt in default solely for the purpose of facilitating collection of such debt for another The term "debt collector" is basically anyone/business that collects debts for ANOTHER: (6) The term debt collector means any person who uses any instrumentality of interstate commerce or the mails in any business the principal purpose of which is the collection of any debts, or who regularly collects or attempts to collect, directly or indirectly, debts owed or due or asserted to be owed or due ANOTHER. Notwithstanding the exclusion provided by clause (F) of the last sentence of this paragraph, the term includes any creditor who, in the process of collecting his own debts, uses any name other than his own which would indicate that a third person is collecting or attempting to collect such debts. For the purpose of section 808(6), such term also includes any person who uses any instrumentality of interstate commerce or the mails in any business the principal purpose of which is the enforcement of security interests. THE TERM DOES NOT INCLUDE- (A) any officer or employee of a creditor while, in the name of the creditor, collecting debts for such creditor; (B) any person while acting as a debt collector for another person, both of whom are related by common ownership or affiliated by corporate control, if the person acting as a debt collector does so only for persons to whom it is so related or affiliated and if the principal business of such person is not the collection of debts; (C) any officer or employee of the United States or any State to the extent that collecting or attempting to collect any debt is in the performance of his official duties; (D) any person while serving or attempting to serve legal process on any other person in connection with the judicial enforcement of any debt; (E) any nonprofit organization which, at the request of consumers, performs bona fide consumer credit counseling and assists consumers in the liquidation of their debts by receiving payments from such consumers and distributing such amounts to creditors; and (F) any person collecting or attempting to collect any debt owed or due or asserted to be owed or due another to the extent such activity (i) is incidental to a bona fide fiduciary obligation or a bona fide escrow arrangement; (ii) concerns a debt which was originated by such person; (iii) concerns a debt which was not in default at the time it was obtained by such person; or (iv) concerns a debt obtained by such person as a secured party in a commercial credit transaction involving the creditor. Now, as to the cease communications letter. ""Nowhere in the act does it state in article 805 that ceasing communications only applies to 3rd part collection and the very fist page defines collectors as both 3rd party and original creditor. (1st party) "" Yes it does. Section 805 is riddled with "debt collector", not "creditor." Section 805, including the cease communications letter applies to debt collectors-they are CREDITORS, hense that section does not apply to them. (c) CEASING COMMUNICATION. If a consumer notifies a debt collector in writing that the consumer refuses to pay a debt or that the consumer wishes the debt collector to cease further communication with the consumer, the debt collector shall not communicate further with the consumer with respect to such debt, except (1) to advise the consumer that the debt collector's further efforts are being terminated; (2) to notify the consumer that the debt collector or creditor may invoke specified remedies which are ordinarily invoked by such debt collector or creditor; or (3) where applicable, to notify the consumer that the debt collector or creditor intends to invoke a specified remedy. If such notice from the consumer is made by mail, notification shall be complete upon receipt. As you can see above, this section is about DEBT COLLECTORS-not creditors. Hope this helps. You have no basis for sueing them under the FDCPA. This is a dead horse that has been discussed repeatedly on ROR in the past. I'm sorry, but you are mistaken.