http://www.zipdebt.com/blog/buffalo-collection Straight Talk by Charles Phelan on Debt Settlement & Other Debt Reduction Strategies Thu, 04 Dec 2008 18:40:08 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1 http://www.zipdebt.com/blog/buffalo-collection#comment-347 J. Mesina Sat, 05 Aug 2006 17:14:12 +0000 http://www.zipdebt.com/blog/?p=41#comment-347 I believe that the new trend by creditors to sell their debts after getting the tax benefit of charge offs is a method of double dipping, and should be restricted. Creditors get the tax benefit, plus they make money off the sale of the debt. The collection agent gets to collect the entire amount, and this amount is pure profit which is never returned to the original creditor--how is accounting methodology justified to the ecomony, or to consumers? After selling the debt, the original creditor will never accept payment in full from the debtor, only refer them to the collection agent. How is this fair to the consumer that wishes to pay their debt, but does not want to deal with debt collectors especially when it is impossible to know who owns the debt after it has been sold so many times? Ny selling off the debt, the original creditor gets all the benefits; tax breaks, revenue from the sale, unloading the customer from its customer service rolls, and all the legal benefits of being absolved from illegal debt collection practices. This appears to be a win-win for the creditor, and a loose-loose for the consumer. The system seems to be designed to force people into bankruptcy, rather than have them responsibly pay off a debt directly to the creditor. The sale of debt should be restricted, or it should be mandatory for an original creditor to accept payment from a consumer who wishes to settle in full at any time. I believe that the new trend by creditors to sell their debts after getting the tax benefit of charge offs is a method of double dipping, and should be restricted. Creditors get the tax benefit, plus they make money off the sale of the debt. The collection agent gets to collect the entire amount, and this amount is pure profit which is never returned to the original creditor–how is accounting methodology justified to the ecomony, or to consumers?
After selling the debt, the original creditor will never accept payment in full from the debtor, only refer them to the collection agent. How is this fair to the consumer that wishes to pay their debt, but does not want to deal with debt collectors especially when it is impossible to know who owns the debt after it has been sold so many times? Ny selling off the debt, the original creditor gets all the benefits; tax breaks, revenue from the sale, unloading the customer from its customer service rolls, and all the legal benefits of being absolved from illegal debt collection practices. This appears to be a win-win for the creditor, and a loose-loose for the consumer. The system seems to be designed to force people into bankruptcy, rather than have them responsibly pay off a debt directly to the creditor. The sale of debt should be restricted, or it should be mandatory for an original creditor to accept payment from a consumer who wishes to settle in full at any time.

]]>