Advertisement
FCC Asks for Comments on a Challenge to Collectors’ Use of Autodialers to Contact Cell Phones
March 26, 2009
A person has challenged a part of a declaratory ruling handed down by the FCC that allows autodialed or prerecorded collection calls to cell phones if the number is given at the time of credit application.
Edwards’ asserts in his petition that many consumers transfer or “port” their landline telephone numbers to wireless service when initially signing up for cell phones. If the consumer provides a landline number at the time of a credit application and then later ports that number to wireless service, then the “prior express consent” required to make automated or prerecorded collection calls to a wireless number under the TCPA does not exist. Edwards concludes that compliance with the TCPA requires that the consumer must have provided the creditor a telephone number assigned to a wireless service in order for calls to the wireless telephone number to be permissible.
In a declaratory ruling released in January 2008, the FCC announced that the prior express consent requirement of the TCPA is satisfied when a debtor provides a cell phone number to a creditor during the transaction that results in the debt owed ("FCC Rules Creditors, Collectors May Call Cell Phones with Autodialers, Prerecorded Messages," Jan. 4, 2008). With this ruling, the FCC relieved debt collectors of the need to follow more onerous procedures, such as obtaining separate consents, before making collection calls to debtors at wireless telephone numbers that were provided on a loan application or otherwise furnished at the beginning of the business relationship.
ACA International, the association for credit and collection professionals, distributed a letter early Thursday urging members and others in the accounts receivable management industry to register comments with the FCC on the petition. ACA’s request led to the declaratory ruling in 2008.
The FCC placed a notice on the Federal Register on March 18 asking that any interested party submit comments on the petition by April 2. The deadline for reply comments is April 13. Comments may be submitted through the FCC’s Web site: http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/, or the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Comments can also be sent by email to ecfs@fcc.gov and by mail to 236 Massachusetts Avenue, NE., Suite 110, Washington, DC 20002.
Paul D.S. Edwards is no stranger to requests for clarification of rules that impact the ARM industry. A quick Internet search of his name reveals numerous requests to the Federal Trade Commission for clarification of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) dating back to 1991. Several of his requests list him as associated with the “Consumer Information Center, Inc.” His name also appears on several lawsuits against debt collection agencies.
Care to Comment?
(Please read our comments policy first.)
Interested in more stories like this?
Tell us what topics you're interested in and we'll keep you posted. Enter your email address below.
Tell us what topics you're interested in and we'll keep you posted. Enter your email address below.
Related Resources
News
Analysis
Publications
Research
Products and Services
Advertisement
Advertisement
Comments
Comment from Lethal on March 26, 2009 at 10:55AM EST
I filed my comment and urge eveyone to do the same. This country is moving in the wrong direction with its attitude towards debt. WE need to be doing all we can to keep holding debtors responsible.
Comment from Will Turner on March 26, 2009 at 10:58AM EST
With the state of the economy and the banking industry it is in our nation's best interest to allow debt collectors to contact debtors via the debtors' cell phone, even when using an autodialer. After all they are helping return money that belongs to someone else. The consumer isn't the victim here.
Comment from paybill on March 26, 2009 at 11:27AM EST
I filed my comment too. Simply incredible. Once again, the left and "consumer advocates" in this country will attempt to destroy our industry and country for that matter.
Comment from Tpal on March 26, 2009 at 2:58PM EST
We are headed for $200 co-pays and even more outrageous fees on other debt if we are continued to be handcuffed in the valuable service we provide the entire economy.
Comment from FR. on March 26, 2009 at 7:22PM EST
How hard is it to understand. If debts do not get paid costs of services will go up. Simple math!
Comment from Anonymous on March 27, 2009 at 11:08AM EST
If the news coverage is correct and our economic troubles will correct themselves with an opening of the credit markets, the fastest and most immediate way to do that is by allowing collectors and the ARM industry to do what they do best. Allowing more contacts with debtors will only help the recovery to be more immediate and will result in more credit from traditional sources like the banks on Wall Street to new sources like small businesses of Main Street.
Comment from Anonymous on March 27, 2009 at 4:18PM EST
Creditors have a legal right to be able to collect obligations that are owed to them. If collection efforts are hampered, losses increase and the costs will be passed along to all consumers. I should know - I am a credit card executive with 31 years experience in this industry.
Comment from PublicServiceMsg on March 28, 2009 at 1:44AM EST
With the NBC's Dateline media coverage of the tactics at the agencies in New York, the public opinion of agencies will warrant strict regulation and higher penalties. This type of collections is causing the hampering of the industry.
Comment from arm013 on March 31, 2009 at 3:08PM EST
It is the industry's longstanding refusal to police itself that has led to strict regulation. The penaltys for violating the so-called consumer protection acts are deminimis. The majority of collectors opening acknowledge to their clients that such annoyances are merely a cost of doing business. With less regulation, the industry continue to abuse consumers without regard to the legitimacy of the debt.
Comment from jmapes on April 13, 2009 at 11:37PM EST
I don't believe more regulation ever solves anything. Honestly, we've seen how regulation is the grounds for lawyers to draw lines all over the issue and we play cute footsy games with the law and the rules. Remember, deregulation didn't cause the recession, the government's encouragement of looser credit requirements lead to the pandemic. I don't forsee misinformed and misguided lawmakers helping the situation.
One comment had it right. The U.S. is headed for a rude awakening. The belief has become that you can walk away from anything and start over, with absolution of mistakes. Government giving "buffers" to human mistake, attempting to lessen risk, has caused a collapse of the old fashioned but true law of risk vs reward, truth and consequenses.
I have worked (shortly) for a rogue agency before, leaving quickly on the heals of realization of the path they were headed down. They no longer exist. This was not because they were sued into oblivion, they had that covered by residing in a state they could control. Their business practices, just like a production company that makes bad parts, came to the light of their customers (clients). Their reputation spread and they ultimately could not get any more business. This didn't take law. It was sound rationale by business self correcting the bad.
The government needs to stop treating the public like babies. They make mistakes they need to deal with their mistakes. The different rationale with cell phones is that of the policy makers avoiding updating the laws to work with newer technology (portable numbers and dialers).
In the end the jobs go to India because it's too expensive to have Americans manually dial. Great work on keeping jobs in in he U.S.!