My mother in St. Louis was the recent recipient of a claim from Merchant's Guide, saying that their "client" CFB Financial II LLC had hired them to collect this debt.
I did some checking. Maybe the "F" in CFB Financial is Michael Fromknecht, who has several posts on collectionindustry (do a search for his user name of "mgfrom" without the quotes; you'll see where he's listed as EVP - Exec. Vice Pres - of Merchant's Guide). And, maybe the "B" in CFB is for Daniel Burtis and Edwin Burtis, who are listed as corporate officers of Merchants Guide.in state records, CFB lists the exact same address for its office location (all the way to the suite number) as Merchant's Credit Guide.
If the "client" and the collection agency are really one and the same, isn't it unfair and deceptive to represent them as separate entities, creating a false oppressive appearance that several companies are coming down on you? Any attorneys have a thought on that?
They know that they're working to prey on the weaker people; people who might not know a thing about their rights, and making it seem like 2 companies are after them might be just the straw that does something to subject them to a lawsuit on a 15 year old debt. As one of the posts apparently by Fromknecht indicates, they are fully aware that "There is so much volume when working the older debt the key is to find the ones wanting to pay and not argue with those with no intent to pay. We instruct our collectors if somoeone does not want to pay on an out of stat debt, go on to the next one, no arguing, no need to debate, call a new number and find a payer." "I realize it is perfectly legal to be firm with your collection approach on out of stat debt, provided you do not threaten something you can not follow through on (the old ability and intent thing.)" IF MERCHANTS CREDIT IS EVEN MENTIONING GARNISHMENT, LAWSUIT, OR ANYTHING ON AN OUT OF STAT DEBT (which means outside of the statute of limitations), make your complaint to your state attorney general.
BUT BE CAREFUL! DO NOT SIGN OR SEND BACK THE "FORM" THAT THEY SEND TO YOU. That may be a trick to get you "back in stat" if you acknowledge the debt (by even so much as agreeing to "make a monthly payment that is affordable to you." Then they *may* go right ahead and file suit against you, because you may have just acknowledged the debt and brought it back "in stat" made the statute of limitations start to run again. This isn't legal advice. I'm just asking for an opinion from any attorneys out there!
0 comments