internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/
List archive
Re: [internetworkers] AT&T is evil, reason number 53462
- From: "Cheryl Smith" <jesuismoi AT gmail.com>
- To: "Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/" <internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: [internetworkers] AT&T is evil, reason number 53462
- Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:05:47 -0400
Previous history w/ a collection agency leads me to this:
-Write your state attorney general as soon as possible
-When you do, point out in very clean logical terms that you were not
a party to the contract between the company and ATT.
-CC ATT, the bill collection agency, and the BBB, and the defunct
business owner (even if the mail is just going to come back to you).
-To the collection agency: send all mail registered
-Do not try and solve anything on the phone. The conversations are
too hard to prove and aren't as binding.
-Look up some of the websites on the Fair Debt Collection Act. Be
sure to use the language they reccommend. There are certain key
phrases that you will need to use.
-According to my ex Finance proff, who helped write said act, once
they have violated the FDCA, the debt becomes uncollectable. In my
case two years of letters failed to get that point home.
(An apartment put me in collection when the person who signed a lease
on my old apartment didn't move in. That's a problem with the
contract with that person, not me, but they tried to get her rent out
of ME. However, since a) they never bothered to contact me before
selling it to collection (a violation of the FDCA) and b)my last
check, which they had the option to not cash, had some language
specific to Texas indicating that all debts between us were free and
clear and c)they had a lease with someone else for those days, the
whole thing was bunk. The collection agency's proof (when demanded)
of the debt? A copy of my original lease. Collection agency didn't
care the debt was not mine. Just didn't care. I finally got them to
go away when they called my fiance's phone (which I had bought him)
and harassed him... and I reported that to my attorney general. They
aren't allowed to harass third parties about your "debt" like that.)
Next time anything like this (god forbid) happens to me, I'm going
straight to the Attorney General.
Good luck!
-Cheryl
On 8/8/07, Mark Turner <markt AT siteseers.net> wrote:
> Both parties, the collection agency and Bellsouth, deny adding my social
> security number to the account. One of them MUST have, because under no
> circumstances would I be so dumb as to attach my personal SSN to a
> client's phone bill.
>
> The real question I have is against whom do I file the complaint with
> the AG? Right now, I'm leaning towards the collection agency. I don't
> trust either one of them at this point though , frankly. I could
> probably get their debt paid, too, but right now I'm so pissed off that
> I want to see this through. Bah.
>
> I haven't seen a shred of paper from either party, either, so I
> requested those. We'll see what turns up.
>
> Mark
>
> Thomas Beckett wrote:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > Lyman Green wrote:
> >
> >> I would suggest you not let this go for long without getting
> >> assistance. I would bet they have no qualms about trashing your
> >> credit rating if you are considered to have 'defaulted' on these bills
> >> even if you don't have anything to do with them.
> >>
> >
> > I agree with Lyman. They have violated a number of US and NC laws at
> > this poing, on credit reporting and debt collection.
> >
> > Also, this may not be AT&T proper, it might just be a collection agency
> > they've hired. Collection agencies are notorious for not giving a shit
> > about anyone.
> >
> > It might help to send a letter to the CEO of AT&T. The CEO will never
> > read it, of course, but the problem will be addressed and routed to the
> > proper place from the top. I usually look at the investor relations
> > info on a company's website or at finance.yahoo.com to find out who is
> > CEO.
> >
> > http://www.att.com/gen/investor-relations?pid=5711
> > http://finance.yahoo.com/q/pr?s=T
> >
> > TaB
> > - --
> > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Thomas A. Beckett, JD & MBA Business Law and Consulting
> > 828-713-1668 <http://www.tbeckett.com> 919-824-5696
> > Authentication instructions: <http://www.tbeckett.com/verification.html>
> > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
> >
> > iD8DBQFGujzhEMCfelopa1cRAhlIAKCTx1kZ1rhKMTt7/IzuD4elm90Y7ACg3wIb
> > EWaPd5ZsGEH/2/92sCPO+0I=
> > =i9Wc
> > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > ---
> > Come and play at the InterNetWorkers Web site!
> > http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/
> > You are currently subscribed to InterNetWorkers mailing list
> > To unsubscribe visit
> > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/internetworkers
> >
>
> ---
> Come and play at the InterNetWorkers Web site!
> http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/
> You are currently subscribed to InterNetWorkers mailing list
> To unsubscribe visit
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/internetworkers
>
-
[internetworkers] AT&T is evil, reason number 53462,
Mark Turner, 08/08/2007
-
Re: [internetworkers] AT&T is evil, reason number 53462,
Lyman Green, 08/08/2007
- Re: [internetworkers] AT&T is evil, reason number 53462, Michael Czeiszperger, 08/08/2007
-
Re: [internetworkers] AT&T is evil, reason number 53462,
Thomas Beckett, 08/08/2007
-
Re: [internetworkers] AT&T is evil, reason number 53462,
Mark Turner, 08/08/2007
- Re: [internetworkers] AT&T is evil, reason number 53462, Thomas Beckett, 08/08/2007
-
Re: [internetworkers] AT&T is evil, reason number 53462,
Cheryl Smith, 08/16/2007
-
Re: [internetworkers] AT&T is evil, reason number 53462,
Mark Turner, 08/16/2007
-
Re: [internetworkers] AT&T is evil, reason number 53462,
Simon Spero, 08/19/2007
- Re: [internetworkers] AT&T is evil, reason number 53462, Shea Tisdale, 08/19/2007
- Re: [internetworkers] AT&T is evil, reason number 53462, Steven Champeon, 08/19/2007
- Re: [internetworkers] AT&T is evil, reason number 53462, Shea Tisdale, 08/19/2007
- Re: [internetworkers] AT&T is evil, reason number 53462, Steven Champeon, 08/19/2007
- Re: [internetworkers] AT&T is evil, reason number 53462, Steven Champeon, 08/20/2007
- Re: [internetworkers] AT&T is evil, reason number 53462, Andrew C. Oliver, 08/22/2007
-
Re: [internetworkers] AT&T is evil, reason number 53462,
Simon Spero, 08/19/2007
-
Re: [internetworkers] AT&T is evil, reason number 53462,
Mark Turner, 08/16/2007
-
Re: [internetworkers] AT&T is evil, reason number 53462,
Mark Turner, 08/08/2007
-
Re: [internetworkers] AT&T is evil, reason number 53462,
Lyman Green, 08/08/2007
- Re: [internetworkers] AT&T is evil, reason number 53462, Mark Turner, 08/08/2007
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.