Best report
ϟ
Mar 8, 2016
} demand for payment letter .... seems to ignore the FDCPA
It's awkwardly written puffery and has one non-sentence. A few lines I find potentially misleading. I'm confused most by the "agreement" language, almost turning the letter into a contract of adhesion. Any agreement regarding collection costs is already in the lender contract anyway, assuming a valid debt. This would never fly as a G-letter, but it reads in fairness like a "big hammer" follow-on after prior contacts fail to inspire payment. Of course, the most glaring violation would be the false representation that this came from a real law firm rather than thugs with a window-dressed website.
It's awkwardly written puffery and has one non-sentence. A few lines I find potentially misleading. I'm confused most by the "agreement" language, almost turning the letter into a contract of adhesion. Any agreement regarding collection costs is already in the lender contract anyway, assuming a valid debt. This would never fly as a G-letter, but it reads in fairness like a "big hammer" follow-on after prior contacts fail to inspire payment. Of course, the most glaring violation would be the false representation that this came from a real law firm rather than thugs with a window-dressed website.