Collection Call Rec'd Looking for DD

[StarkRaven$]

My phone never rang but I had a vm today from a restricted number from a debt collector looking for DD. A little unsettling because the female voice addressed me by my first name. She said there is a court case, blah, blah... not for me but DD's and they show my address listed on where to locate her. Caller never identified what company she represented but left # 855-583-7112 with reference #. Caller stated that I am hereby warned that they will be contacting DD at my address for a debt and I must call back to let them know if DD is no longer at my address. I am a little unnerved at the fact the caller knew my first name. I alerted DD and she said she received the same call and she is paying off her debts. I decided to call the number and no one answered and then the line dropped. DD hasn't lived in our home in over five years.

 

Should I be concerned that this debt collector addressed me personally by my name in seeking DD's debt? 

[insolent1]

No. Anyone can go online, punch in a name, and some sites will respond with spouses, kids, parents, or others who may live or have lived there. Reverse directories can do the same thing and find neighbors who might know who lives at an address and may be willing to talk. Lexis/Nexis, reverse 9-1-1, and others can do the same thing to a much greater degree and with much greater accuracy.

[StarkRaven$]

2 hours ago, insolent1 said:

No. Anyone can go online, punch in a name, and some sites will respond with spouses, kids, parents, or others who may live or have lived there. Reverse directories can do the same thing and find neighbors who might know who lives at an address and may be willing to talk. Lexis/Nexis, reverse 9-1-1, and others can do the same thing to a much greater degree and with much greater accuracy.

Sigh...my cell # has been pretty much off the grid but obviously not anymore. ☹️

[centex]

DD?

 

1) you got a call...big deal.

2) It was not for you. 

3) Most people don't understand what is easily found with the Accurint or other similar subscription products.

4) If a letter comes, then deal with it at that time

5) Whoever DD is, let them know to take care of their business.

[cv91915]

I am regularly greeted by my first name in calls and texts from completely random real estate agents who want to know if I realize what a great time it is to sell my home at 2772 Grundle Court.
 

 

 

Edited November 19, 2020 by cv91915

[StarkRaven$]

1 hour ago, centex said:

DD? Dear Daughter

 

1) you got a call...big deal.

2) It was not for you. 

3) Most people don't understand what is easily found with the Accurint or other similar subscription products.

4) If a letter comes, then deal with it at that time

5) Whoever DD is, let them know to take care of their business. We did. 

 

[StarkRaven$]

I listened again to the vm. It said our address will be associated with court filings for daughter's debt. I have a question hopefully someone can answer for me. If a process server were to show up at our door to serve daughter who does NOT live here. Can I get rid of them by giving them the address where she lives? Or, will they legally have accomplished their job by serving papers by giving them to me since I am a relative? 

 

Daughter is dismissive of all this but my DH and I do NOT like our address linked to debt collectors, attorneys, process servers, etc. We are very private and live next to a neighbor who thrives on gossip and he sits on his front porch 70% of the time.

 

Unrelated but DD is an older adopted child (10 years old when we adopted her) and not that attached to us. In other words she is secretive and distant.

[cashnocredit]

1 hour ago, StarkRaven$ said:

I listened again to the vm. It said our address will be associated with court filings for daughter's debt. I have a question hopefully someone can answer for me. If a process server were to show up at our door to serve daughter who does NOT live here. Can I get rid of them by giving them the address where she lives? Or, will they legally have accomplished their job by serving papers by giving them to me since I am a relative? 

 

Daughter is dismissive of all this but my DH and I do NOT like our address linked to debt collectors, attorneys, process servers, etc. We are very private and live next to a neighbor who thrives on gossip and he sits on his front porch 70% of the time.

 

Unrelated but DD is an older adopted child (10 years old when we adopted her) and not that attached to us. In other words she is secretive and distant.

1. A process server doesn't call. They just show up.

2. A process server can't serve you in lieu of your DD.

3. When a debt collector starts babbling about a "court case" it's meant to intimidate because they know most people fear courts. They almost never exist. Costs money to file and phone calls, texting is virtually free.

[StarkRaven$]

1 hour ago, cashnocredit said:

1. A process server doesn't call. They just show up. Yes I am aware. The element of surprise.

2. A process server can't serve you in lieu of your DD. Thank you. Wasn't quite sure from the SD court site.

3. When a debt collector starts babbling about a "court case" it's meant to intimidate because they know most people fear courts. They almost never exist. Costs money to file and phone calls, texting is virtually free. 

DD is almost 30 now and is living the high life with a good job and a wealthy boyfriend but I don't like her dirty laundry left at our address with debt letters. This is the third time something concerning her debt landed at our door. I am not confident she'll take care of it so our quiet life will not be interrupted.

 

Thanks for listening. 

[cashnocredit]

1 hour ago, StarkRaven$ said:

DD is almost 30 now and is living the high life with a good job and a wealthy boyfriend but I don't like her dirty laundry left at our address with debt letters. This is the third time something concerning her debt landed at our door. I am not confident she'll take care of it so our quiet life will not be interrupted.

 

Thanks for listening. 

They can serve a family member at the same home she lives at. But not if she doesn't live there. Should a process server show up just say she no longer resides there. Feel free to give them her address.  But again, it's really very unlikely. They just haven't done the basic work to locate her and are going by really old info using scare tactics to hope to score.

Edited November 20, 2020 by cashnocredit

[StarkRaven$]

1 hour ago, cashnocredit said:

They can serve a family member at the same home she lives at. But not if she doesn't live there. Should a process server show up just say she no longer resides there. Feel free to give them her address.  But again, it's really very unlikely. They just haven't done the basic work to locate her and are going by really old info using scare tactics to hope to score. 👍 👏 😄 Thanks so much Cashnocredit!  I feel better now and you have helped clear my head immensely.

 

[legaleagle2012]

Check the court docket to see if a court case actually exists. If it does, sue the debt collector for an FDCPA violation, discussing the debt with a third party. They are allowed to call a third party once for location information only, but it appears they went beyond that.  They could only discuss the debt if she was a minor.

[hdporter]

17 hours ago, cv91915 said:

I am regularly greeted by my first name in calls and texts from completely random real estate agents who want to know if I realize what a great time it is to sell my home at 2772 Grundle Court.

 

I think I inadvertently did a drive by the other day .... (I was taking a leisurely run through Gooch Pass ...)

[centex]

14 hours ago, cashnocredit said:

1. A process server doesn't call. They just show up.

2. A process server can't serve you in lieu of your DD.

3. When a debt collector starts babbling about a "court case" it's meant to intimidate because they know most people fear courts. They almost never exist. Costs money to file and phone calls, texting is virtually free.

1 is not always accurate.  There are some who will make an effort to contact and arrange a place that is more convenient for the Respondent...process servers hate wasting time and they ALSO know that whatever is being served can be inconvenient in a workplace.  When the Respondent makes things difficult, it DOES become adversarial. 

 

2 is not always accurate- it depends entirely on the Rules of the jurisdiction.  In some places, leaving process with an adult at the address of record IS deemed to be service.  Don't give one-size-fits-all guidance that could lead people down a ruinous path.

 

3 is in the partially-correct category.  Oh, and they aren't worried about the costs of filing since attorney fees and costs of filing are included in the award on the back end, and those are often generally subject to the same post-judgment interest per annum as the award itself. 

[centex]

6 hours ago, legaleagle2012 said:

Check the court docket to see if a court case actually exists. If it does, sue the debt collector for an FDCPA violation, discussing the debt with a third party. They are allowed to call a third party once for location information only, but it appears they went beyond that.  They could only discuss the debt if she was a minor.

1) it does not appear that an actual conversation took place

2) it DOES appear this was a location voice mail

3) only an incompetent person would pursue litigation without properly evaluating the circumstance and fact of a particular case

[StarkRaven$]

1 hour ago, centex said:

1) it does not appear that an actual conversation took place

2) it DOES appear this was a location voice mail

3) only an incompetent person would pursue litigation without properly evaluating the circumstance and fact of a particular case

I finally got through to a live person at the phone # provided. Female who answered said they were not a collection agency and they prepare papers for attorneys. When I asked her if she was ready for me to provide the reference # from the vm she hung up on me.

[StarkRaven$]

1. Substituted Service may be used if personal service has not been successful after several attempts to serve the person.
   • For Substituted Service copies of the papers are left at the place of residence (home), or normal place of business of the person to be served.
   • The papers must be left with a person who is at least 18 years old. The person given the papers must live in the same home or be the person in charge at the place of business.
   • The person given the papers must be told what the papers are about and who they are for.
   • Do not leave the papers yourself.
   • After leaving the papers, the person serving the papers must also mail a copy of them to the party to be served, at the same address where the papers were left.
   • Do not mail the papers yourself.
   • The copies must be sent by first-class mail, with enough postage (stamps) to get the envelope delivered.
   • The party is considered served ten days after the copies are mailed.
   • The person who made the efforts to serve the party in person must write a Declaration of Due Diligence (under oath) to file with the Court.
   • The Declaration of Due Diligence must tell, in detail, what efforts he/she made to serve the party in person.
   • This Declaration must be filed along with the Proof of Service also signed by the person who served the papers.

From the SD superior court web site. I receive no mail for DD except one other random collection letter two months ago. She is not on the lease where we live either.

[hegemony]

if they call again do this:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsZGHxb4caA

 

 

[CreditSucksNot]

4 hours ago, StarkRaven$ said:

I finally got through to a live person at the phone # provided. Female who answered said they were not a collection agency and they prepare papers for attorneys. When I asked her if she was ready for me to provide the reference # from the vm she hung up on me.

My guess is even if DD has debt issues this was a scam phone call hoping you would pay them on her behalf.  

 

Typically process servers don't call ahead of time they just show up.  The verbiage you mentioned in your first post just smells of the scam calls I have received similar to yours.   Make sure DD knows it is likely a scam and not to pay them.  If she were to pay her name goes on the sucker list and they will wait a couple of months and call again with a new version of the scam to get more money out of her.

[cashnocredit]

6 hours ago, centex said:

1) it does not appear that an actual conversation took place

2) it DOES appear this was a location voice mail

3) only an incompetent person would pursue litigation without properly evaluating the circumstance and fact of a particular case

All true. Especially 3

6 hours ago, StarkRaven$ said:

I finally got through to a live person at the phone # provided. Female who answered said they were not a collection agency and they prepare papers for attorneys. When I asked her if she was ready for me to provide the reference # from the vm she hung up on me.

Classic. Oh, us? We're not a collection agency. Nah. We just do paperwork for attorneys.  Yeah, sure. Possible they are skip tracers but more likely scamming collectors trying to get a quick score with fear by babbling about serving papers. They hung up because too much time had passed and your initial question indicated you were no longer potential fresh meat.

[StarkRaven$]

4 hours ago, cashnocredit said:

All true. Especially 3

Classic. Oh, us? We're not a collection agency. Nah. We just do paperwork for attorneys.  Yeah, sure. Possible they are skip tracers but more likely scamming collectors trying to get a quick score with fear by babbling about serving papers. They hung up because too much time had passed and your initial question indicated you were no longer potential fresh meat.

Called them again and they answered. I cut through the chase and said I have a reference # for them. They I.D. DD. I said she no longer resides here. They didn't ask me any personal info about DD or me. I then asked what is the name of their business. They said Alliance but refused to give out address or state they're located in.

 

Again I appreciate the feedback. I'm no longer concerned because if in the rare chance a process server were to show up, I know what to expect. They can't serve me papers.

 

 

Edited November 20, 2020 by StarkRaven$

[cashnocredit]

4 hours ago, StarkRaven$ said:

Called them again and they answered. I cut through the chase and said I have a reference # for them. They I.D. DD. I said she no longer resides here. They didn't ask me any personal info about DD or me. I then asked what is the name of their business. They said Alliance but refused to give out address or state they're located in.

 

Again I appreciate the feedback. I'm no longer concerned because if in the rare chance a process server were to show up, I know what to expect. They can't serve me papers.

 

 

That narrows it down. As was probable, they were collectors using fear inducing techniques. If they were skip tracers they would have asked for DD's info.

[legaleagle2012]

only an incompetent person would pursue litigation without properly evaluating the circumstance and fact of a particular case

 

We go with the little info they give us. Voicemails and emails are just as good as a live conversation; in fact, even better in some respects because it eliminates "he said she said" arguments. A prominent debt buyer sent me a very detailed email discussing all details of the debt they had purchased. That email cost them a LOT of money because it was clearly visible to anyone who happened to look at my computer. It is not MY obligation to protect a debt buyer from violating the FDCPA; it is their obligation to assure that they do not commit any.

 

In this case, no great amount of study is required. The "debt collector" left a voicemail discussing the details of a debt with a third party, in clear violation of the FDCPA. If they are too stupid to find out where their victim actually lives, too bad for them. When in doubt, don't call and blab about the debt in a voicemail when you have no idea who might hear it.

 

Now before somebody from Texas throws out another "incompetent" remark, at least one Circuit (mine) has ruled on this in a related type of case.

 

In Cerrato v. Solomon & Solomon — F.Supp.2d —-, 2012 WL 6621339 (D.Conn. 2012), Judge Hall found that a debt collector violated a consumer’s cease-and-desist by making 8 attempts to call the customer after the cease-and-desist, even though the customer never answered any of those calls.  The Court analogized to Foti‘s holding that voicemail messages were ‘communications’ under the FDCPA, and found, therefore, that call attempts and identification of the calls on the caller ID constituted debt collection ‘communications’ under the FDCPA.

 

Also, in  Zortman v. J.C. Christensen & Assocs. (2012)
"The court described the crucial elements as a message that did no more than “merely identify the caller as a debt collector”, without “identifying the intended recipient of the message, [or] reveal[ing] that the intended recipient owes a debt…”

 

In other words, a message must reveal the fact that someone owes a debt before it violates third p[arty disclosure, which happened here. It appears that there is enough here to constitute a violation.

[StarkRaven$]

2 hours ago, legaleagle2012 said:

only an incompetent person would pursue litigation without properly evaluating the circumstance and fact of a particular case

 

We go with the little info they give us. Voicemails and emails are just as good as a live conversation; in fact, even better in some respects because it eliminates "he said she said" arguments. A prominent debt buyer sent me a very detailed email discussing all details of the debt they had purchased. That email cost them a LOT of money because it was clearly visible to anyone who happened to look at my computer. It is not MY obligation to protect a debt buyer from violating the FDCPA; it is their obligation to assure that they do not commit any.

 

In this case, no great amount of study is required. The "debt collector" left a voicemail discussing the details of a debt with a third party, No details of the debt was discussed with me and I did not ask. Not my problem. The caller simply called alerting me that my address would be associated in courts for filing. 

 

[StarkRaven$]

12 hours ago, cashnocredit said:

That narrows it down. As was probable, they were collectors using fear inducing techniques. If they were skip tracers they would have asked for DD's info.

Interesting.