A debt collector might tell you that you have 30 days to dispute the debtβthis is a correct disclosure. But elsewhere in the letter, they tell you they're demanding payment in only five days, and that further delay "could be costly."
That's overshadowing, because the threat contradicts the disclosure of rights; and creates confusion about the rights of the consumer.
π
What is overshadowing?
The other day I mentioned that "overshadowing" is illegal and some people had questions.
It's a simple idea: the FDCPA requires debt collectors to make a variety of disclosure to consumers about their rights. And they cannot use other language in the letter that seems to contradict, override, or cause confusion about those disclosures.
Here's an example:
π
This overshadowing would be illegal for two reasons: first of all, it means there's been no effective disclosure, violating the disclosure requirement, and it's also misleading and deceptive, violating the ban on deceptive means of debt collection.
A debt collector who uses overshadowing language has broken the law.
And their debt to you may overshadow any amount they've been trying to collect.
Make them pay.
We're preparing to sue this debt collector for this illegal letter. If you've gotten one like this, let us know.
But in the process, they trample all over your legal rightβyour right not to be tricked or deceived.
This letter is a legal violation known as "overshadowing." They bombard you with language and information designed to deceive you in hopes of overcoming the mandatory disclosure in the fine print. They want you to act out of fear, and they don't want you to be fully informed.
π
You can see what they're doing here. The language choices in the headline and body of the letter are clearly designed to trick people into thinking that the debt collector is preparing to take legal action. That's why the letter talks about "obligation," "legal right," "legal owner," and threatens "further collection activities."
They want you thinking about lawyers and their legal rights.
π
Finally, it says, "As the owner of this obligation, we have the legal right to seek repayment."
Only in the fine print does the letter admit that they can't really do anything to collect it, but by the time you read that part, the game is already over.
π
This nasty new letter has a bold headline: "You have an obligation to resolve this."
Then in the letter itself, it makes two claims: "As the legal owner of this account, we are entitled to repayment." Then it says, if you don't pay, "we will review your account for further collection activities."
π
It's nasty.
There's a nasty new letter that one big debt collector is using to trick people β and we're getting ready to sue them for it.
This debt collector is targeting people whose debts have expired, so it's legally impossible for them to report it on a credit report, or to file a lawsuit to collect it. The only thing they can do is send letters.
π
#FoxNews #host #angry that #Trumpβs β#fascistβ #rhetoric is #overshadowing #Senate #sex #tape.
#WillCain said the #media should focus not on the #antiimmigrant #Bloodpoisoning #rehetoric of the likely #GOP #presidential #candidate, but on the #actions of an #ex-#Senate #aide.
MikeWas
Susan Larson βοΈπ³οΈβππ³οΈββ§οΈπ