Student Loans & Debt

[Sharing Lights]

reserved

[Sharing Lights]

I placed extensive research on Student Loans supported by law cases and findings of the Governmental Officials.
 
Unfortunately, I am deprived to access it at Suijuris.net, while, in full faith,
entrusted to keep my research and Posts at its data banks.
 
The Trustee has violated my Trust.
 
If anyone can repost the student loan section
here, we can all constructively arrive to the core of the issue.
 
I, also, express my opinion that wserra does not, purposefully,
mislead any one here.
 
He relies on what has found.
 
Law in the US is, mostly, man made, nowadays,
[rather judges and interests groups made]
and is interpreted by different judges differently
according to their agenda
and how much they like or dislike the Litigators, etc.
 
Let's present all sides - that's all.
 
When all of you share your knowledge and abilities, only
the best would come out.
 
 Let's not fear any disagreement but deal with it respectfully.

[Sharing Lights]

One step at a time:
 

The general link is at:
 
Shining Spotlight on Racket of Debt Collection - Suijuris Forums
 
The SJ system by works of "clean hands and heart"
of Akira does not "grant" access to
my, own Posts.
 
Thank you, papa -Akira for helping all Sovereigns
that much, particularly when members have questions
and need educational assistance.
 
Way to build Sovereignty - "man."
 
Shining the Spotlight on DC is under Banks and CRA section.
 
I would try to figure out where some copies may be.
 
I should have transferred them here but who knew that holes
again would assume the shape of T and S...
just for exposing fallacies in papa's arguments over the Constitutional Laws?

=====================================================
Suijuris Forums > Educational & Learning > Travel
NO LICENSE - PERFECTED LEGAL ARGUEMENT
 

SL: I would be so surprised if the little angel with wings above his butt,

would not delete the trails of his disgrace of banning one of top researchers
for disagreeing with his wingness.
 
Or heavy editing at least post factum when I am blocked to reply.

Today, 02:17 PM
Akira-
Super Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Maine state
Posts: 290
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pure Trust
It is a primary rule of contract law that ambiguous terms are to be interpreted in favor of the non-preparer.
 
 
Byars v. United States 273 USR 28 (1927):
“Constitutional provisions for the security of person and property, are to be liberally construed, and it is the duty of courts to be watchful for the constitutional rights of the Citizen and against any stealth encroachment thereon.
 
16Am Jur 2d., Sec. 97:
“Any constitutional provision intended to confer a benefit should be liberally construed in favor of the clearly intended and expressly designated beneficiary”
 
And I Am That Beneficiary !!!
__________________
I'm not a rapist, I'm a defacto lover !
 
"Damn democracy. It is a fraudulent term used, often by ignorant persons but no less often by intellectual fakers, to describe an infamous mixture of socialism, miscegenation, graft, confiscation of property and denial of personal rights to individuals whose virtuous principles make them offensive." Westbrook Pegler: New York Journal American, 1/25/51, entitled "Upholds Republic of U.S. Against Phony Democracy, Democracy in the U.S. Branded Meaningless"

Akira-
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Akira-
Find all posts by Akira-
 
#103 Today, 03:06 PM
Sharing Lights
Banned User
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Republic of NY & Sovereignty that was meant & shall be!
Posts: 6,375
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Akira-
Byars v. United States 273 USR 28 (1927):
“Constitutional provisions for the security of person and property, are to be liberally construed, and it is the duty of courts to be watchful for the constitutional rights of the Citizen and against any stealth encroachment thereon.
 
16Am Jur 2d., Sec. 97:
“Any constitutional provision intended to confer a benefit should be liberally construed in favor of the clearly intended and expressly designated beneficiary”
 
And I Am That Beneficiary !!!

Logic does not stand here.
 
Akira, you clarified that the statement was your opinion
and not actual Constitutional Provision , which I thought
you referred to and, so, I erred [admitted] in that (mis)understanding.
That was cleared.
 
Since there is no controversy that it was your opinion,
you have no support in law or logic to claim being
 
 

And I Am That Beneficiary !!!

 
to your opinion while, you attempt
to hide under the wing of the Constitution,
somehow, expecting such, miraculous transfer.
 
OPINION DOES NOT = CONSTITUTION unless it is contained in latter!__________________

[Sharing Lights]

1. Coverage (Sections 803(2, 5, 6), 811)
 

Attorneys or law firms that engage in traditional debt collection activities (sending dunning letters, making collection calls to consumers) are covered by the FDCPA, but those whose practice is limited to legal activities are not covered.(6)
 
Similarly, filing or service of a complaint or other legal paper (or transmission of a notice that is a legal prerequisite to enforcement of a debt) is not a "communication" covered by the FDCPA, but traditional collection efforts are covered.(7)
 

A student loan is a "debt" covered by the FDCPA;

(8) however, alimony, tort claims, and non-pecuniary obligations are not covered.(9)
 
A salaried attorney who collects debts on behalf of, and in the name of, his creditor employer,(10) and a state educational agency that collects student loans,(11) are exempt from coverage by the FDCPA.
 
Debt collectors (including attorney debt collectors) are subject to the venue limitations of the FDCPA. (12)

[Sharing Lights]

2. Communications by debt collectors (Sections 805(b), 806(3-4))
 

An attorney debt collector, who represents either (1) a creditor or (2) a debt collector that previously tried to collect an account, may report his collection efforts to the debt collector.(13)
 
An attorney may communicate with a witness in a lawsuit that has been filed.(14)
 
A debt collector may provide a list of consumers, against whom judgments have been entered, to an investigator in order to locate such individuals.(15)
 
A debt collector may place a public notice required by law as a prerequisite to enforcing the debt.(16)

3. Dispute and verification (Section 809)
 

An attorney debt collector must provide the required validation notice, even if a previous debt collector (or the creditor) has given such notice.(17)
 
A debt collector does not comply with the obligation to verify the debt simply by including proof with the first communication to the consumer.(18)

[Sharing Lights]

Wserra, I believe, is correct to state that
the Department of Education (DOE) is not subjected to
the FDCPA.

However, always check with your, State's laws,
which may provide greater protection.

After, I locate the original research, I would re-post.
 
It is a shame to waste time for matters well researched already.
 
Fairness and Integrity demanded this response in
equal administration of "Justice" as pertaining to possible
misunderstanding by different sides.
 
Accuracy should come first.
 
PS. I believe that more than not - the DOE does not pursue the
alleged debts directly but utilizes the 3rd party debt collectors,
which are subjected to the FDCPA.
 
Read carefully from whom the dunning letter arrived?

[Sharing Lights]

4. Specific exemptions from definition of debt collector.

(a) Creditor employees. Section 803(6)(A) provides that "debt collector" does not include "any officer or employee of a creditor while, in the name of the creditor, collecting debts for such creditor."
 
The exemption includes a collection agency employee, who works for a creditor to collect in the creditor's name at the creditor's office under the creditor's supervision, because he has become the de facto employee of the creditor.
 
The exemption includes a creditor's salaried attorney (or other) employee who collects debts on behalf of, and in the name of, that creditor.
 
The exemption

does not include a creditor's former employee who continues to collect accounts on the creditor's behalf, if he acts under his own name rather than the creditor's.

(b) Creditor-controlled collector. Section 803(6)(B) provides that "debt collector" does not include a party collecting for another, where they are both "related by common ownership or affiliated by corporate control, if the (party collects) 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."
 
The exemption applies where the collector and creditor have "common ownership or . . . corporate control." For example, a company is exempt when it attempts to collect debts of another company after the two entities have merged.
 
The exemption does not apply to a party related to a creditor if it also collects debts for others in addition to the related creditors.
 
(c) State and federal officials. Section 803(6)(C) provides that "debt collector" does not include any state or federal employee "to the extent that collecting or attempting to collect any debt is in the performance of his official duties."
 
The exemption applies only to such governmental employees in the performance of their "official duties" and, therefore, does not apply to an attorney employed by a county government who also collects bad checks for local merchants where that activity is outside his official duties. [53 Fed. Reg. 50103]
 

The exemption includes a state educational agency that is engaged in the collection of student loans.

[Sharing Lights]

wserra: The FDCPA specifically exempts “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.” 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(6)(c).
 
Specifically, see Burgess v. U.S. Dept. of Education, 2006 WL 1047064 (D.Vt. 2006) (the FDCPA does not apply to an attempt to collect a student loan by Dept. of Ed. employees).

SL: Concur.
 
DISCLAIMER:
 
Not agreeing that is how it should be
but stating that this is how it is!
 

I believe wserra referred to the last prong properly
and I substantiate that by evidence provided hereto.
 
Justice demands impartiality.
 
I reiterate again, wserra, that your conduct toward me at Quatloos,
(you know what you did,)
is exempt from your right to express
your opinions and research and
I am the first one to defend such openly.
 
There is no hidden agenda in my statements, as
I am confident enough to express any disagreements
directly with all.
 
As for the previous conduct by you of others and
myself at Quatloos, I may not respond on their behalf;
whereas, mine has been expressed in this Thread consistently.
 
As for the rest, may that, simply, be on your consciousness.
 
That's all or, may I suggest, redemption by useful research
for members who need assistance by knowledge shared.

[Sharing Lights]

A member obtained for me an image of the actual Post,
referring to the debt collection of student loans and
the department of eduction.
 
Foreseeing possible confusions and discrepancies, I put Disclaimer on any Forum
where I began to write extensively:
 

In order to preserve accuracy,
my writing(s) may be re-posted unedited
& in context only!

I believe that knowing how accurate I am,
producing the most extensive debt collection
research on the Web, others assumed that reference
to my research was correct and safe to re-state.
 
However, the reference was faulty, while the research,
itself, was accurate.
 
In the future, as I have suggested, the actual copies
in contexts would avoid faulty hearsay.
 
What was actually Posted:
 
Banks; predatory Tactics vs Students and Former Students
 

#31 10-31-2007, 07:24 PM
Sharing Lights
Banned User
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Republic of NY & Sovereignty that was meant & shall be!
Posts: 6,375
 
Quote:
Section 803(5) defines "debt" as a consumer's "obligation . . . to pay money arising out of a transaction in which the money, property, insurance, or services (being purchased) are primarily for personal, family, or household purposes . . .."
 
1. Examples. The term includes:
 
Overdue obligations such as medical bills that were originally payable in full within a certain time period (e.g., 30 days).
A dishonored check that was tendered in payment for goods or services acquired or used primarily for personal, family, or household purposes.
A student loan, because the consumer is purchasing "services" (education) for personal use.
.................
__________________
Sacred Triangle: Believe/Learn/Accomplish.
Foundation: is the Virtues.
Result: re-discover your,
Higher Self
to Absorb & Share Harmony, connecting
- Above & Below -
Past & Future
Fulfilling Your Destiny!
 

- Sovereignty, Strength, & Tolerance
In order to preserve accuracy,
my writing(s) may be re-posted unedited
& in context only!
All Rights & Liberties Reserved
Without Prejudice
Objecting forced label - "Come & Get Some!"
 
 
Sharing Lights
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Sharing Lights
Visit Sharing Lights's homepage!
Find all posts by Sharing Lights
Add Sharing Lights to Your Buddy List

#32 10-31-2007, 07:25 PM
Sharing Lights
Banned User
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Republic of NY & Sovereignty that was meant & shall be!
Posts: 6,375
 
Quote:
(c) State and federal officials. Section 803(6)(C) provides that "debt collector" does not include any state or federal employee "to the extent that collecting or attempting to collect any debt is in the performance of his official duties."
 
The exemption applies only to such governmental employees in the performance of their "official duties" and, therefore, does not apply to an attorney employed by a county government who also collects bad checks for local merchants where that activity is outside his official duties. [53 Fed. Reg. 50103]
 
The exemption includes a state educational agency that is engaged in the collection of student loans.
 
(d) Process servers. Section 803(6)(D) provides that "debt collector" does not include "any person while serving or attempting to serve legal process on any other person in connection with the judicial enforcement of any debt."
 
The exemption covers marshals, sheriffs, and any other process servers while conducting their normal duties relating to serving legal papers.
 
....................
__________________
Sacred Triangle: Believe/Learn/Accomplish.
Foundation: is the Virtues.
Result: re-discover your,
Higher Self
to Absorb & Share Harmony, connecting
- Above & Below -
Past & Future
Fulfilling Your Destiny!
 

- Sovereignty, Strength, & Tolerance
In order to preserve accuracy,
my writing(s) may be re-posted unedited
& in context only!
All Rights & Liberties Reserved
Without Prejudice
Objecting forced label - "Come & Get Some!"

Conclusion:
 

I was correct, (Post #32 of
Banks; predatory Tactics vs Students and Former Students )
wserra was correct, reference to my writings
was alleged inaccurately but, apparently,
in bona fide error.
 
The solution has been reiterated.

[Sharing Lights]

http://www.edcombs.com/CM/Notices/notices147.asp
 
The case may help in your defense.
 
Notices
 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

ALEX VOLKOV, Plaintiff, Case Number: 01 C 4038
v. Judge Rebecca R. Pallmeyer
ALLIED INTERSTATE, INC. and Magistrate Judge Ian H. Levin
ALLIED INTERSTATE WEST, INC.,
Defendants.
 
NOTICE OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT
 
PLEASE READ THIS NOTICE CAREFULLY.
THIS IS NOT A NOTICE OF A LAWSUIT AGAINST YOU.
YOU MAY BENEFIT FROM READING THIS NOTICE.
 
I. WHY ARE YOU RECEIVING THIS NOTICE?
This Notice informs you, pursuant to Rule 23(c)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure, that there is a settlement in a consolidated class action lawsuit, entitled Alex Volkov v. Allied Interstate, Inc. and Allied Interstate West, Inc., Case Number 01 C 4038, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois Eastern Division. You have been identified as a member of this class.
II. WHAT IS THIS LAWSUIT ABOUT?
Plaintiff, Alex Volkov, filed this class action lawsuit against Allied Interstate, Inc. and Allied Interstate West, Inc.. (defendants), alleging that the defendant violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. '1692 et al. (AFDCPA@).
Defendants deny that they violated the FDCPA and therefore maintains that it is not liable to the plaintiff or any class member.
III. WHO IS IN THE CLASS?
On January17, 2002, the Court certified a class for the purposes of settlement. The class consists of (i) all individuals with Illinois addresses (ii) who were sent a letter in the form represented by Exhibit A of the complaint, (iii) on or after January 1, 2001, (iv) which was not returned as undeliverable by the Postal Service.
IV. WHAT ARE THE POTENTIAL BENEFITS?
 
The Court has preliminarily approved a settlement in this action. According to the terms of the settlement, defendants agree to pay $39,7500.00 to the class, divided equally among each class member who submits a valid claim form. The claim may be made by returning the claim form enclosed with this notice to defendants= attorneys on or before May 15, 2002.
Plaintiff, will be paid $1,500 in satisfaction of his individual claims and may share in the class recovery.
 
Counsel for the class, subject to court approval, will be paid $13,750.00 for attorney=s fees and costs.
The defendants are to make all payments within thirty (30) days after the Court grants final approval of the settlement, unless there is an appeal of the approval. The hearing on final approval will be held at a Fairness Hearing on May 30, 2002 at 9:00 a.m. You need not attend this hearing to participate in this settlement.
V. RELEASE.
Under this settlement, you are giving the defendants a release, whether or not you submit a claim form, unless you opt-out of the class. You are releasing defendants from all claims for statutory damages arising from the allegations in the complaint. This settlement does not release any claims for actual damages.
VI. WHAT CAN YOU DO?
1. Participate in the class settlement. For you to participate in this settlement, you must make a claim. You may make a claim by using the claim form enclosed with this notice. You must submit your claim form by May 15, 2002 in order to get the benefits of the settlement described above.
2. Opt-Out. If you object to the settlement, you must submit your objection in writing to the Clerk of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, 219 South Dearborn Street, Suite 2722, Chicago IL 60604. The objection must be received by the Clerk of the Court by May 15, 2002. By the same date, you must also serve copies on the attorneys listed under "Who Represents the Class?," below, and on Scott Thomas, Raymond Persin of Thomas & Persin, 500 West Madison, Suite 2790, Chicago, Illinois 60610 (attorney for defendants). Any objection must include the name and number of the case and a statement of the reasons why you believe that the Court should find that the proposed settlement is not in the best interests of the class. If you do file an objection and wish to be heard, you may also appear at the Fairness Hearing before Judge Pallmeyer on May 30, 3002 at 9:00 a.m. Please note that it is not sufficient to simply state that you object. You must state reasons why the settlement should not be approved.
IMPORTANT: THE COURT REQUIRES THAT ANY OBJECTIONS BE RECEIVEDBY THE CLERK BY MAY 30, 2002. IF YOU MAIL AN OBJECTION, YOU BEAR THE RISK OF ANY PROBLEM WITH THE MAILS.
 
If the settlement is not approved, the case will proceed as if no settlement has been attempted. There can be no assurance that if the settlement is not approved, the class will recover more than is provided in this settlement, if indeed anything.
This description of the case is general and does not cover all of the issues and proceedings thus far. In order to see the complete file, you should visit the office of the Clerk of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, 219 S. Dearborn St., 20th Floor, Chicago, IL 60604. The Clerk will make the files relating to this lawsuit available to you for inspection and copying at your own expense.
If you submit a claim form in timely fashion, defendant will send you a check within 30 days after final approval of the settlement, unless there is an appeal. If you wish, you may consult with an attorney, or file objections, as described above, at your expense. You also have the right to file an appearance in the case if you wish.
This notice is only a summary of the terms of the proposed settlement.
VII. WHO REPRESENTS THE CLASS?
The Court has appointed the following attorneys as Class Counsel:
Daniel A. Edelman
Cathleen Combs
James O. Latturner
Adela C. Lucchesi
EC&L Number 7163
EDELMAN, COMBS, LATTURNER, & GOODWIN, LLC
120 South LaSalle Street, 18th Floor
Chicago, Illinois 60603
 
Class Counsel represents your interests in this lawsuit. You will not be charged for their services. You may, however, hire your own attorneys at your own cost to advise you in this matter.
VIII. WHAT IS THE OPINION OF CLASS COUNSEL CONCERNING
THE VALUE OF THE SETTLEMENT?
The attorneys for the class believe that this settlement is fair, reasonable, and in the best interests of all members of the class.
Plaintiff filed his Complaint on this class action lawsuit on May 31, 2001, alleging that defendant violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. 1692 et seq. (AFDCPA@).
 
Class counsel believe that the payment provided for by this settlement is fair and reasonable and that the class members should accept this settlement.
IX. WHO CAN HELP WITH ADDITIONAL INFORMATION?
Any further questions that you or your attorney may have concerning this Notice should be directed to Class Counsel, Edelman, Combs, Latturner & Goodwin, LLC (phone number and address given above).
DO NOT ADDRESS ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE CASE TO THE CLERK OF THE COURT OR TO THE JUDGE. They are not permitted to answer your questions.
X. FAIRNESS HEARING
You do not have to attend this hearing in order to receive the benefit of this settlement. On May 30, 2002 at 9:00 a.m., a hearing will be held on the fairness of the proposed settlement. At the hearing, the Court will be available to hear any objections and arguments concerning the fairness of the proposed settlement. The hearing will take place before Judge Pallmeyer in Room 2119 of the United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois, 219 S. Dearborn Street, Chicago Illinois 60604.
Michael W. Dobbins,
Clerk of the Court
 
 
 
 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

ALEX VOLKOV, Plaintiff, Case Number: 01 C 4038
v. Judge Rebecca R. Pallmeyer
ALLIED INTERSTATE, INC. and Magistrate Judge Ian H. Levin
ALLIED INTERSTATE WEST, INC.,
Defendants.
 
 

CLAIM FORM

Please fill out this form and return to the following address:
Name:
Current Address:
Social Security Number:
Signature:
Please return this claim to:
 
Scott Thomas
Raymond Persin
THOMAS & PERSIN
500 West Madison, Suite 2790
Chicago, Illinois 60610
 
By: May 15, 2002

[Sharing Lights]

http://allied-interstate.pissedconsumer.com/
 
Allied Interstate
Allied Interstate is one of the famous important collection agencies.
 
Its fame was earned by this collection agency through notorious practices
to extort money from people. Examples of such practices are available here from
Pissed Consumer Reviews.
 
Read reviews from people that have suffered and fought Allied Interstate back.
 
Readers will find advice that will save them money, experience of foreclosure and
bankruptcy in the long-run.
 
Consumer Rating: 158 Review Points
 
-----------------------------------
SL: keep in mind that complaints and accuracy are not the same.
However, preponderance of evidence may be there.

[Sharing Lights]

Allied Interstate, Inc (Intellirisk) Bud Says

Head Debt Collectors:
 
Part of the Intellirisk Companies Vikas Kapoor, President & CEO
Randy Christofferson, Chairman of the Board
Norman Merritt, CFO
ALLIED INTERSTATE, INC.(BAD REPUTATION!)Jeff Swedberg,
PresidentJim Pond, Senior Vice President55 N. Arizona Place, #505
Chandler, AZ 85225
Phone: (480) 722-7810
Fax: (480) 782-7001
 
5062 N 19th Ave Ste 102
Phoenix, AZ 85015-3225
Phone: (602) 841-4332
Fax: (602) 841-7388
 
31229 Cedar Valley Dr
Westlake Village, CA 91362-4036
Phone: (818) 575-5400
 
3111 S Dixie Hwy Ste 101
West Palm Beach, FL 33405-1520
Phone: (561) 671-2121
Fax: (561) 671-2165
 
340 Interstate North Pkwy SESte 140
Atlanta, GA 30339-2201
Phone: (770) 989-5700
Fax: (770) 989-5724
 
7103 Chancellor Dr., Suite 100
Cedar Falls, IA 50613
Phone: (561) 671-2152
Fax: (561) 671-2165
 
5910 Shingle Creek Pkwy.
Brooklyn Cntr, MN 55430-2322
Phone: (763) 503-6595
Fax: (763) 585-7881
 
435 Ford Rd Ste 800
Minneapolis, MN 55426-1066
Phone: (952) 546-6600
Fax: (952) 595-231113777 Ballantyne Corporate Pl Ste 200
Ballantyne Corporate Pk.
Charlotte, NC 28277-3425
Phone: (704) 943-1000
Fax: (704) 943-1053
 
3200 Northline Ave Ste 135
Greensboro, NC 27408-7616
Phone: (336) 333-3100
Fax: (336) 373-4442
 
15 Hazelwood Dr., Suite 102
Amherst, NY 14228
Phone: (716) 691-1320
Fax: (716) 691-3534
 
1979 Marcus Ave Ste 100
New Hyde Park, NY 11042-1002
Phone: (516) 437-0800
Fax: (516) 437-6121
 
3070 Lawson Blvd
Oceanside, NY 11572-2711
Phone: (516) 561-6552
Fax: (516) 561-6548
 
3000 Corporate Exchange Dr.
Columbus, OH 43231
Phone: (614) 901-7988
Fax: (614) 901-7794
 
12655 N Central Expy, Suite 925
Dallas, TX 75243-1700
Phone: (972) 934-8448
Fax: (972) 404-1611
 
14550 Torrey Chase, Suite 550
Houston, TX 77014
Phone: (281) 580-2000
 
Fax: (281) 580-0396
 

Bud Says...

This company is a class action lawsuit waiting to happen. Sloppy record keeping, failure to validate at every level, under-trained, uneducated collectors SEVERELY lacking in Fair Debt Collection Practices Act training.

Intellirisk must be making BIG bucks in collecting because they sure don't spend it to insure they comply with the laws. Student loans with these idiots is a nightmare. Most Allied collector's don't have a clue in handling even the most basic of consumer complaints. Loans that have been paid, in the wrong names and outdated credit bureau reporting are fast targets for lawsuits because Allied is unable or unwilling to respond.

If you receive a collection notice from Allied DISPUTE IT! Even though you will never receive a reply, it is important that you use the law to your advantage. Allied aptly fits the saying; "the right hand hasn't a clue what the left hand is doing" Brain-Dead! Idiots! Untrained!

May I state again....THANK GOD FOR THE FAIR DEBT COLLECTION PRACTICES ACT!! Someone in Washington must have had a dream about companies like Allied to enact the law. THANK YOU! THANK YOU!

WATCH YOUR WALLET, YOUR CHECKBOOK AND YOUR CREDIT CARDS WHEN DEALING WITH THESE SLIPPERY CONS OF THE COLLECTION WORLD, THEY WILL EMPTY YOU OUT!

budhibbs.com

[Sharing Lights]

Politely but firmly stress to the 3rd party debt collector that
a student loan is a "debt" covered by the FDCPA!
 
Therefore, it must comply with FDCPA even if believes that
is not subjected to UCC.
 
Furthermore, any 3rd party den collector must produce Admissible Evidence of the alleged debt
even if attempts it to collect on behalf of the State.
 
Copying unverified claims is not sufficient to demand payments -
not to mention receiving them.
 
Full VALIDATION i.e. producing proof of claim is a must.

[Sharing Lights]

FTC Staff Commentary on the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act
 
NEW COMMENTS BASED ON RECENT STAFF LETTERS TO ATTORNEYS
 
The staff has added comments to reflect the large volume of written advice it has provided to attorneys following repeal of the "attorney-at-law" exemption in July 1986. (5)
This section synthesizes the conclusions reached in the most significant additions made to the Commentary based on this recent correspondence.
 
1. Coverage (Sections 803(2, 5, 6), 811)
Attorneys or law firms that engage in traditional debt collection activities (sending dunning letters, making collection calls to consumers) are covered by the FDCPA, but those whose practice is limited to legal activities are not covered.(6)
 
Similarly, filing or service of a complaint or other legal paper (or transmission of a notice that is a legal prerequisite to enforcement of a debt) is not a "communication" covered by the FDCPA, but traditional collection efforts are covered.(7)
 
A student loan is a "debt" covered by the FDCPA;(8) however, alimony, tort claims, and non-pecuniary obligations are not covered.(9)
 
A salaried attorney who collects debts on behalf of, and in the name of, his creditor employer,(10) and a state educational agency that collects student loans,(11) are exempt from coverage by the FDCPA.
 
Debt collectors (including attorney debt collectors) are subject to the venue limitations of the FDCPA.(12)

[Sharing Lights]

Hearing Archives :Committee on Ways & Means : U.S. House of Representatives :

History of Collection Abuses for Student Loans

Some have said that the Department of Education's privatization of collections is a success story and should be a model for the IRS.

I'm sorry to tell you that from the consumer perspective, this is not true.

Many of the debt collection abuses I speak of have occurred in the student loan context.

Private collectors of student loans have repeatedly deliberately deceived consumers by misrepresenting themselves as the Department of Education. They've overcharged consumers for collection fees, used misleading telegrams to trick borrowers, browbeaten borrowers into unaffordable payment plans, threatened them with actions that collectors can't take, and pressured consumers to borrow from relatives.

Moreover, one of the three collection agencies that IRS has chosen to ask for advice on privatizing tax collections has been the subject of repeated lawsuits over its student loan collections. (5) Another company expected to bid on this proposal has been known to misrepresent itself to consumers by using the Department of Education's name on its stationary and to intimidate and confuse consumers with its claim of affiliation with the IRS. (6)

Some of the abuses in the student loan context have specifically arisen because of the fact a federal government program is involved. Student loan borrowers have many important rights, such as discharges, deferments, different payment options, and exemptions, creating a complex scheme for collections. Yet many private collectors do not have enough knowledge about these schemes, which results in consumers being deprived of important options to which they are legally entitled. Even worse, some private collectors misrepresent these rights or steer consumers into options more profitable for the collector. For example, collectors have been known to strong-arm student loan borrowers into agreeing to payment plans that the borrowers could not afford and did not want, despite the consumer's rights under the Higher Education Act to a reasonable and affordable payment plan. (7) Collectors have threatened to offset federal benefits for SSI recipients, even though SSI benefits are protected. They steer consumers into loan refinancing options which may not be appropriate for the consumers.

Some collectors aggressively threaten wage garnishments, failing to inform or misrepresenting the rights of consumers to hearings and exemptions. Others charge collection fees that exceed the amounts authorized by Department of Education regulations. (8)