Drive Financial Services Drive Services ripoff bad business scam artists illegal collection debt practices Dallas Texas

Mary, thank you for your response. I have admitted, and should again, that this particular area of the law is not one that I am familiar with. As such, I took some time today and took advantage of my free and unlimited access to legal research tools (I'm going to hate it when I have to start paying for this stuff!).

Here are my conclusions (derived from ALR and West's Eleventh Decennial Digest... this should NOT be construed as competent legal advice): Mary is pretty much correct. Drive would be considered, under Federal court interpretations of the FDCPA, as a "first party collector." The effect of this is that they are not considered debt collectors as far as the FDCPA is concerned. In plain English, the FDCPA does not apply to them. Drive, as a first party collector, may use virtually any means necessary to collect the money that you owe them, provided that they don't hand the debt over to a collection agency or outside attorney.

Sorry guys, but when you take on a loan from a sub-prime (which in my opinion is just a nice way to say predatory) lender, you run the risk that, if you do not pay, they will use some pretty harsh tactics to get their money out of you. The sociological and pubilc policy implications of this are a subject for another day. The bottom line is that you have failed to pay your debts for one reason or another, and the law is on the side of the creditor.

Per third party collections and the FDCPA this is where the paths of Mary and I diverge. Mary, you seem to be presenting the argument that the FDCPA shouldn't be taken literally, and I wholeheartedly disagree. If we can't rely on the plain meaning of a statute, what good is the whole body of law? For the sake fo our fellow readers, and with apologies to the EDitor, here are the pertinent sections of the FDCPA:

"805(b)
COMMUNICATION WITH THIRD PARTIES. Except as provided in section 804, without the prior consent of the consumer given directly to the debt collector, or the express permission of a court of competent jurisdiction, or as reasonably necessary to effectuate a postjudgment judicial remedy, a debt collector may not communicate, in connection with the collection of any debt, with any person other than a consumer, his attorney, a consumer reporting agency if otherwise permitted by law, the creditor, the attorney of the creditor, or the attorney of the debt collector."

And

" 804. Acquisition of location information [15 USC 1692b]

Any debt collector communicating with any person other than the consumer for the purpose of acquiring location information about the consumer shall -- (3) not communicate with any such person more than once unless requested to do so by such person or unless the debt collector reasonably believes that the earlier response of such person is erroneous or incomplete and that such person now has correct or complete location information"

I think the plain meaning and legislative intent behind these clauses is fairly obvious. The purpose of the FDCPA is to avoid collection by harrassment, but in a quote by you from an earlier rebuttal ("Is it embarrassing? YES! That is the point!"), you clearly indicated that the policy, of your company at least, is in opposition to these aims.

To say that people have presented arguments of harrassment in court which were shrugged off is of no consequence to me. There are numerous reasons why a court of law would not accept such arguments. For instance, if the argument was posed to absolve the debt it would certainly be ineffective. Harassment by the collector doesn't clear the unrelying debt, it is a separate claim altogether. Unfortunaltely, the consumer may think otherwise, and while knowing what his rights are, he is ignorant of the proper manner to assert those rights.

Beyond that, to recover in civil dmages for violations of the FDCPA the consumer would probably have to show that he actually suffered some degree of financial or emotional harm. This is where Mary is correct in asserting that harrassment is a tough charge in court. Harassment may very well have transpired, but if you haven't actually suffered any damages as a result of it, you are out of luck. And this is where I would argue that just because something is legal doesn't mean it's right. It may be quite difficult to win on a harrassment charge against an aggressive collector, but that doesn't mean that you weren't in fact, if not in law, harrassed.

Tim,

Each state has different laws as to collections. the Federal law states you must go with whichever is stricter. The FDCPA or the state which you are in. It seems that everyone has the same complaint about the calls to there work place. When you mentioned that the FDCPA allows you to contact the employer only once, you are only partly right. Let me explain. If you are in the legal field, as I am, and are well versed in the laws of the FDCPA and apply them to use in every aspect of you work, then you know how to interpret them. you made reference to the law under the FDCPA sub section 804(3), Acquisition of location Information. It states that a collector shall not communicate with any such person more than once unless requested to do so by such person unless the debt collector reasonably believes that the earlier response of such person is erroenous or incomplete. Here is where the law goes "gray". A collector has every right to call an employer unless, the employer tells the collector that employees are not allowed to have personal calls and to call them at home, or the collector receives a letter from the debtor to cease all calls to the employer. Just because you read it one way under the FDCPA does not mean it is to be taken literally. I have been in court when debtors have brought this very issue up along with the charge of harrassment. In all cases the judge threw out there arguement. I do all the legal work for a third party collector. They call employers every 3rd day and leave a message without giving the name of hte collection agency unless asked by the recpetionist. Under first party collections, they are allowed to call everyday. And they will call every number they have to reach the debtor. Now, there are collection companies out there that are working under the eyes of the law, but they are few and far between. You have to realize that when you get credit from a sub-prime lender, they will do everything possible to make sure there investment is protected. As I have mentioned to Debbie, who is having all of this trouble with Drive Services. If you dont want Drive calling you all of the time, then make your payments on time, clear up your credit, and then purchase a different car using a different lender that will offer you a more favorable rate. Debbie has the power to stop all of this from happening to her, as do alot of others, but instead of taking contol of the situation, they would rather type out there sob stories and try to intice a class action lawsuit, in reference to her last statement of, " so lets get these guys and see if we can get money from them for the pain and suffering, emotional distress and financial hardship that they may be causing because of loss of jobs because they continue to call you at work and harass you."

Tim,

Each state has different laws as to collections. the Federal law states you must go with whichever is stricter. The FDCPA or the state which you are in. It seems that everyone has the same complaint about the calls to there work place. When you mentioned that the FDCPA allows you to contact the employer only once, you are only partly right. Let me explain. If you are in the legal field, as I am, and are well versed in the laws of the FDCPA and apply them to use in every aspect of you work, then you know how to interpret them. you made reference to the law under the FDCPA sub section 804(3), Acquisition of location Information. It states that a collector shall not communicate with any such person more than once unless requested to do so by such person unless the debt collector reasonably believes that the earlier response of such person is erroenous or incomplete. Here is where the law goes "gray". A collector has every right to call an employer unless, the employer tells the collector that employees are not allowed to have personal calls and to call them at home, or the collector receives a letter from the debtor to cease all calls to the employer. Just because you read it one way under the FDCPA does not mean it is to be taken literally. I have been in court when debtors have brought this very issue up along with the charge of harrassment. In all cases the judge threw out there arguement. I do all the legal work for a third party collector. They call employers every 3rd day and leave a message without giving the name of hte collection agency unless asked by the recpetionist. Under first party collections, they are allowed to call everyday. And they will call every number they have to reach the debtor. Now, there are collection companies out there that are working under the eyes of the law, but they are few and far between. You have to realize that when you get credit from a sub-prime lender, they will do everything possible to make sure there investment is protected. As I have mentioned to Debbie, who is having all of this trouble with Drive Services. If you dont want Drive calling you all of the time, then make your payments on time, clear up your credit, and then purchase a different car using a different lender that will offer you a more favorable rate. Debbie has the power to stop all of this from happening to her, as do alot of others, but instead of taking contol of the situation, they would rather type out there sob stories and try to intice a class action lawsuit, in reference to her last statement of, " so lets get these guys and see if we can get money from them for the pain and suffering, emotional distress and financial hardship that they may be causing because of loss of jobs because they continue to call you at work and harass you."

Tim,

Each state has different laws as to collections. the Federal law states you must go with whichever is stricter. The FDCPA or the state which you are in. It seems that everyone has the same complaint about the calls to there work place. When you mentioned that the FDCPA allows you to contact the employer only once, you are only partly right. Let me explain. If you are in the legal field, as I am, and are well versed in the laws of the FDCPA and apply them to use in every aspect of you work, then you know how to interpret them. you made reference to the law under the FDCPA sub section 804(3), Acquisition of location Information. It states that a collector shall not communicate with any such person more than once unless requested to do so by such person unless the debt collector reasonably believes that the earlier response of such person is erroenous or incomplete. Here is where the law goes "gray". A collector has every right to call an employer unless, the employer tells the collector that employees are not allowed to have personal calls and to call them at home, or the collector receives a letter from the debtor to cease all calls to the employer. Just because you read it one way under the FDCPA does not mean it is to be taken literally. I have been in court when debtors have brought this very issue up along with the charge of harrassment. In all cases the judge threw out there arguement. I do all the legal work for a third party collector. They call employers every 3rd day and leave a message without giving the name of hte collection agency unless asked by the recpetionist. Under first party collections, they are allowed to call everyday. And they will call every number they have to reach the debtor. Now, there are collection companies out there that are working under the eyes of the law, but they are few and far between. You have to realize that when you get credit from a sub-prime lender, they will do everything possible to make sure there investment is protected. As I have mentioned to Debbie, who is having all of this trouble with Drive Services. If you dont want Drive calling you all of the time, then make your payments on time, clear up your credit, and then purchase a different car using a different lender that will offer you a more favorable rate. Debbie has the power to stop all of this from happening to her, as do alot of others, but instead of taking contol of the situation, they would rather type out there sob stories and try to intice a class action lawsuit, in reference to her last statement of, " so lets get these guys and see if we can get money from them for the pain and suffering, emotional distress and financial hardship that they may be causing because of loss of jobs because they continue to call you at work and harass you."

Mary... your rebuttal displays an important point in the world of ripoffs - just because something is legal does not mean it's right. As in many such cases, the practices you speak of are certainly not so much condoned by the law as they are wild stretches of what the law will allow. For example, the FDCPA allows a debt collector to contact an employer ONCE, and only to gain location information. So how is it that you feel the debtor has to tell you to stop calling their employer? Do you continually justify it as a means of assuring accurate information? Maybe harrassment is hard to prove in court (or so says the one who doesn't want to get sued for harrassment!), but that doesn't mean it hasn't transpired.

I'm sure your lawyers have devised some crafty twists of logic that enable you to skirt the letter of the FDCPA, but that doesn't mean you aren't in flagrant violation of its spirit. In passing that act Congresss implied that, as a nation, we value one man's dignity over another man's dollar. The debt collector is fully within his rights to collect what he is owed, but in so doing he is not within his rights to debase the debtee's character by publicizing his indebtedness.

But hey, as long as you only imply that someone's employee or neighbor is a deadbeat, you're not doing any harm, right?

In response to the first person who complained about drive financial. You have to remember you are being financed by drive because no one else would finance you.

Yes there tactic's are out there, but they are with in the realm of the law.

I head up the legal department of a collection agency in Denver. You stated you worked in collections over 20 yrs. If so, then you should know the differences between first party collections and third party collections. Drive is first party. They are under a different set of regulations then third party collections. They are allowed by law to make those calls to you everyday.

They are allowed by law to call your neighbors, they are just not allowed to tell them why they are calling. They can leave there name and number and ask them to post a note on your door. Is it embarrassing? YES! That is the point! If you do not want calls to your work then the law states you must submit a letter to your creditor to stop calls to your employer.

Do not tell them this over the phone because it needs to be in writing. They will also call all numbers off of your original application. The point is to embarrass you to the point you pay. It is all legal! And remember, harrassment is a LEGAL term, not an EMOTION! And harrassment is extremely hard to prove in court. So, I would either stop whining and make your payments on time, or get rid of the vehicle and go to one of those buy here pay here places, and see if you fair better.

I too am a customer of Drive. I could not get financing although I tried. The dealer was able to get me financed through them, and I was happy to accept, I wanted to re-establish credit. I went to Drive, they did not beat my door down and make me sign the contract.

I have been late one or two times, and I have always called them. I used calm, descent language and explained my situation. They were very nice in return. They did explain the costs of being late, but never have they treated me with disrespect.

A person has to remember that this company finances high risk borrowers and perhaps their tactics may not be what you would like, but remember... they did lend you the money!

I am happy with Drive, and for those who are not, get financing with someone else and pay them off... that will solve your worries.

There is one lady (Marva) in the collections department with whom I spoke with when I was late, and she made me feel as ease and helped me through the problem.

Maybe one needs to reason why one is having so many problems with them, but as for me, I appreciate the new PT Cruiser I drive, and will never bite the hand of the one who fed me!

I am a client of Drive Services as well. I lost my job, and I am now being sued. I have been called names by Drive employees. My neighbors have been called, and my personal business exposed. I have been followed, and harrased on a daily basis. I had all my phone numbers changed, and drive is completely relentless. I can't do much to stop their behavior, but together something can be done. I filed reports with the Better Business Bureau, The FTC, The ACLU (they used racial slurs), and the Attorney General. Together we can stop these animals.

To direct your research a little more efficiently, I suggest you look up the Federal "Fair Debt Collection Practices Act." I'm not very familiar with it, but I do know that it looks very disfavorably on collections calls made to workplaces.

The do-not-call list does not apply to people who are tring to collect a legitmate debt. To suggest that this is solicitation is a real stretch of the definition of the word "solicitation," probably stretching it too far for the law to recognize. For you and Drive, the solicitation part is done, they're just conducting business now. That doesn't mean that you don't have rights. Send them a signed letter demanding that they cease and decist contacting you by telephone and the law may provide you with recourse if they don't.

Judging by the complaints against this company (and granted there are many) they seem to be in the business of granting loans to people who could not get them elsewhere. They are assuming a huge risk by doing this, and they offset this risk by aggressive collections, and I'm guessing, interest rates that are at the limits of state usary laws.

If you are in default on your loan they're going to take some pretty extreme steps to make sure they don't lose out, as is their right. It is not, however, their right to violate the law, and if they are doing so than you should find out what your recourses are. I'd reccomend contacting your state Attorney General.