Article Details40 States want the federal government to crack down on Debt Relief Companies |
| Date Added: November 13, 2009 05:00:00 PM |
| Author: Jennifer McClelland |
| Category: Business: Credit Cards |
| The attorneys general of Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Guam, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia and Wyoming have all requested the Federal Trade Commission to boost the control of businesses that have been offering debt reprieve to individuals and families in the United States.
One of the things that the FTC is now thinking about imposing on the debt respite agencies is to involve them in the Telemarketing Sales Rule. One wrong step from the Credit Solutions of America corporation led to the actions being filed. The corporation has been wrongly claiming that it could decrease credit card debt by 50%. This exasperated Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan enough to sue the company and its CEO. In the lawsuit, Madigan states that Credit Solutions of America in no way go through with their side of the agreement and never truly negotiate with the creditors of their customers even though the customers stop paying their creditors directly and are truly making payments to Credit Solutions of America. Of course, because the creditors arent getting their money, they are suing the customer to get their money; and winning. Madigan has also said that her office has gotten over 12,000 complaints concerning this topic. Some of the rules that the FTC is thinking about imposing on the debt relief businesses include: - Prohibiting the agencies from charging the user anything until services have been performed. This would also need more disclosure to patrons; counting how long it will take to clear up the debts and what it will cost. - Prohibiting the corporation from being capable to misrepresent things such as costs, success rates, and any other information that alludes to the impact of the debt reprieve services on the consumers credit report and credit history. A number of debt reprieve businesses really do what they say they are going to do, but other businesses like this one listed in the lawsuit above are dreadful and need to be regulated. The businesses that do what they state they do shouldnt have an issue with the new set of laws that are imposed on them. Because the businesses already follow the rules, any new rules will just mean that its leveling the playing field for the good businesses. v |
|
|
