In one of the largest collection awards ever granted by a jury, a California couple has been awarded $500,000 in damages for being harassed and threatened by the debt collection agency Credigy Services Corporation, reports insideARM (“Jury Awards $500,000 to California Couple in FDCPA Case,” May 5, 2009).

Under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, which protects consumers against abusive collections tactics by debt collectors, Manuel and Luz Fausto were awarded $100,000 for actual damages and $400,000 in punitive damages, granted by a jury for “malicious and reckless disregard of the couple’s rights.”

The award stems from a dispute over the couple’s Wells Fargo charge card debt they thought they had paid off in the late 1990s, said the Faustos’ lawyer, David Humphreys of Humphreys Wallace Humphreys, P.C.

During the mid-1990s, the couple realized that their credit card balance was continuing to rise even though they were making payments on their account, but a local Wells Fargo branch denied their request to have the account frozen.

To resolve the situation, the Faustos went to a local debt settlement company that promised to negotiate a payoff of the credit card balance. The couple thought the account had been paid off in the late 1990s, after they made two money order payments.

Then in 2006, the couple was contacted by Credigy with a demand to pay $17,000. Even after a cease-and-desist notice was sent to a Brazilian affiliate of Credigy, the debt collection company still made over 90 threatening calls and sent innumerable letters to the Faustos’ home.

Debt collection attorney Manny Newburger says the jury award in this case is one of the largest given to a consumer under the FDCPA, noting that usually “there is little or no evidence of actual damages presented by the consumer.” In this particular case, however, the Faustos were able to document the harassing nature of Credigy’s practices, including the company’s baseless threats, having recorded the last phone call from the collector.

Newburger believes that the verdict in the Fausto case was based largely on state legislation and doesn’t think that the size of the award will motivate more consumers to sue debt collection agencies in the future.

“I think this verdict is indicative of what this jury thought of this particular case,” Newburger said, “but not of anything else.”

Correction: May 8, 2009

This post has been revised to reflect the following correction: The original post mistakenly referred to the $500,000 jury verdict as the largest award conferred upon a consumer under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. In fact, the $500,000 decision is among the largest FDCPA findings on behalf of a consumer, but not the singular largest.

Popularity: 9% [?]

Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan has filed lawsuits against two debt settlement companies for allegedly misrepresenting their services to consumers and failing to follow through on their obligation to settle their clients’ debts, according to a press release from the Illinois attorney general’s office (“Attorney General Madigan Sues Two Debt Settlement Firms,” May 4, 2009).

Madigan has charged debt settlement firms Debt Relief USA, Inc. and SDS West Corporation with violations of the state’s Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act, accusing the companies of deceptively marketing their services and of misrepresenting the impact those debt settlement services would have on clients’ credit.

According to one lawsuit, SDS West, along with its partner Nationwide Support Services, did not adequately inform its customers that their monthly payments would be applied to the company’s fees before the company would provide any of its promised debt settlement services — negotiations with a customer’s creditors for reduced payoff amounts. SDS West also failed to explain to its customers that they would have to make several months of payments before they would accumulate enough funds for the company to begin negotiating these settlement payoffs with the customers’ creditors.

In the second lawsuit, Madigan alleges that Debt Relief USA, which enrolled at least 470 Illinois customers in its debt settlement program between 2005 and 2008, did not “negotiate substantial reductions on most consumers’ accounts” and that most of its clients, having already paid the company’s nonrefundable fees, dropped out of the program before the company settled any of their debts.

Madigan is asking for permanent injunctions against both Debt Relief USA and SDS West that would prohibit them from engaging in debt settlement in the state of Illinois, along with court orders requiring each company to pay restitution, civil penalties of $50,000, and an additional $50,000 for each one of their violations that included intent to defraud.

Popularity: 6% [?]

With a vote of 45 to 51, Senate Republicans defeated a measure that would have allowed bankruptcy judges to modify mortgage terms for bankruptcy filers, dealing a blow to the Obama administration’s foreclosure rescue program, which has yet to make a noticeable dent in the number of families losing their homes, The Washington Post reports (“Senate Defeats Measure to Allow Bankruptcy Judges to Change Mortgage Terms,” April 30, 2009).

The defeated measure would have allowed bankruptcy court judges to modify the mortgage terms of a bankruptcy filer’s primary residence with the possibility of having the filer’s interest rate or principal balance lowered in a process known as a “cramdown.” Currently bankruptcy judges can only modify mortgages for second homes or investment properties.

While opponents of the bill, including the nation’s biggest banks and Republicans in the Senate, argue that the bankruptcy modification provision would increase lending costs for future homebuyers and, therefore, destabilize the housing market even further, supporters of the cramdown measure contend that it would help more than 1.7 million struggling homeowners to stay in their homes.

In spite of the defeat, the measure’s sponsor, Senator Dick Durbin, D–Ill., is determined to keep pushing for cramdown legislation that he says is needed. In the time since he’s been campaigning for bankruptcy code reform, Durbin says home foreclosures have jumped from 2 million to 8 million.

“I’ll be back. I’m not going to quit on this,” Durbin said. “At some point, the Senators in this chamber will decide the bankers shouldn’t write the agenda for the United States Senate.”

The measure is part of a larger Senate housing bill that includes a provision to revamp the Hope for Homeowners program and a proposal to temporarily increase the deposits guaranteed by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and which still has to be reconciled with the House’s version of the bill. House Democrats will most likely remove the cramdown measure from the bill to help get it passed by both houses of Congress.

Popularity: 4% [?]

Hundreds of FBI agents and federal prosecutors could be hired to investigate the estimated 5,000 mortgage fraud claims that are reported every month if a new Senate bill becomes law, reports The Associated Press (“Senate Votes to Hire Hundreds More FBI Agents, Prosecutors to Tackle Mortgage Fraud Cases,” April 28, 2009).

“As foreclosures menace more and more hardworking homeowners, they become more desperate for help,” said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. “Unfortunately, schemers, swindlers, and scam artists are all too happy to pounce.”

To protect homeowners from such scams, the proposed legislation would allow the government to hire 160 special FBI agents dedicated to investigating mortgage fraud, along with 200 support staff. According to current data, despite the doubling of caseloads in the last three years, the FBI has fewer than 250 special agents devoted to financial fraud cases.

Under the proposal, the Justice Department would also be allowed to hire an additional 200 prosecutors and civil enforcement attorneys as well as 100 support staff.

Although the bill — sponsored by Sens. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa — may end up costing more than $265 million a year for the next two years, supporters, including President Obama, say that the legislation would more than pay for itself, reports The Associated Press. Regulators anticipate that the large number of fines and penalties that would result from more aggressive government investigations would subsidize the new legislation.

If approved, the measure would go into effect beginning Oct. 1, 2009, and would cover the 2010 and 2011 budget years.

Popularity: 4% [?]

In what is turning out to be the worst recession since the Great Depression, many Americans are struggling to pay their bills as companies continue to shed jobs and the economy continues to contract.

In this recession, costly expenses like medical bills are taking a backseat to daily expenses like water, electricity, food, car, and mortgage payments. Now, as with credit cards, consumers are struggling to keep up with their medical bills and increasingly letting more and more of their bills go unpaid.

The Commonwealth Fund, a healthcare research foundation, reports that in 2007, 41 percent of adults were struggling to pay their healthcare bills, up from 34 percent in 2005 (“When Medical Bills Outpace Your Means, Seize Control Swiftly,” The New York Times, April 25, 2009). And it’s not just the uninsured who have fallen behind on their payments, nearly two-thirds of people with medical debt actually have health insurance.

Experts say, however, that there are ways to manage your medical debt even if you aren’t capable of paying it off right away.

1. Communicate with your creditor.

If you know you’re going to be late on one or more of your medical bills, let your creditors know. Just talking with them won’t obligate you to make a payment, but if your creditor is aware that you’re trying to stay on top of your debt you may be able to avoid collections, at least temporarily, and protect your credit.

2. Review your bills.

Keep a running tab of your doctor visits and medical procedures to accurately review your bills when they come in. Errors in medical billing can occur often, so if you find a discrepancy call your provider for an explanation. And remember that it can never hurt to resubmit bills to your insurer if you’ve been denied coverage.

3. Bring in extra help.

Try negotiating with your provider for a discount or for some leeway on repayment. If your creditor still won’t work with you, consider hiring a billing specialist who may be able to help you find errors in your medical bills and better understand the often-complex language of medical billing.

4. Avoid the plastic.

Don’t react with panic when you receive a late-payment notice by transferring your medical bill debt onto your credit card. Chances are if you can’t pay your medical bill now, you’re not going to be able to pay the credit card bill when it comes in later. And medical bill charges that stay on your credit card will immediately start earning interest, not to mention that charging a large sum to your credit card could negatively affect your credit score, if you’re carrying too high a debt load.

5. Know your rights.

Just because a medical bill goes to collections, doesn’t mean creditors have free rein to hassle you into paying; they have guidelines and rules to abide by — they can only call between 8 a.m. and 9 p.m. and they can’t scare you into paying the debt. Ask for the caller’s name and request that they send you the name of the creditor and the amount you owe in writing. Visit the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse for a guide to debt collection.

Popularity: 10% [?]