Global Credit & Collections, Inc. allegedly called consumer’s workplace and verbally abused her co-workers during what, in my opinion, amounts to a fourteen day calling spree.
The consumer alleged that co-workers informed her that GCC was calling repeatedly attempting to contact her at their workplace beginning around January 28, 2009,
while the consumer was out of the office recovering from dental surgery.
After a co-worker told GCC’s collector that consumer was unavailable, GCC stated that the attempts to contact the consumer were regarding a “serious legal matter” and that it was “imperative that he make contact” with the consumer. If proven true, this statement violated the FDCPA.
The consumer alleged that on February 4, 2009, Global Credit & Collections called her workplace twice. A co-worker explained that the consumer was out of the office and offered to transfer GCC to consumer’s voicemail. GCC’s collector allegedly responded by accusing the co-worker of lying in an argumentative, accusatory and inappropriate tone. The complaint alleged that GCC never requested a phone number or other location information during this conversation.
The FDCPA complaint alleged that GCC called consumer’s workplace three times on February 9, 2009 despite being told by consumer’s co-workers to stop calling the foster care agency.
A co-worker allegedly answered GCC’s call and explained that the consumer was out of the office and offered to transfer GCC to the consumer’s voicemail. GCC’s collector allegedly demanded to know when the consumer would be available. The co-worker responded that she was unsure and again offered to transfer GCC to the consumer’s voicemail.
According to the complaint, GCC’s collector again demanded to know when the consumer would be available because he was returning her phone call and he really needed to speak with her. The co-worker allegedly asked the debt collector what the call was regarding and the debt collector became very defensive and told her that he could not tell her why he was calling because it was “personal”. The co-worker reminded GCC’s caller that she did not know when the consumer would be available and again offered to transfer GCC to the consumer’s voicemail. The Fair Debt complaint alleged that the debt collector, in an argumentative, accusatory, and inappropriate tone, then accused the co-worker of hiding something and then accused the co-worker of being the consumer. After the debt collector demanded that the co-worker tell him her name, the co-worker transferred GCC’s call to the consumer’s voicemail.
The complaint against the GCC collection agency alleged that GCC called the consumer’s brother on February 10, 2009, repeatedly demanding that he give GCC the consumer’s phone number. The consumer’s brother asked what the call was regarding. The debt collector allegedly replied that he wanted to “work with [consumer] before he files suit on her household.”
The consumer alleged that her brother called her later that day while she was in Indiana providing medical care to her daughter. She became frightened of the prospect that her parents would be next in line for GCC’s harassment. The consumer alleged that she became sick to her stomach over all the harassment of her friends, co-workers, and family members, the threats of litigation, and worry over her daughter’s surgery and recovery.
The complaint alleged that, despite being told not to call again, GCC contacted consumer at her workplace.
According to the consumer, GCC’s collection representative stated that he was going to verify her employment and make an attempt to move forward and, that if the consumer failed to comply, he would move forward against her and escalate the matter. The consumer recalled that GCC’s collection agent stated that he didn’t think that escalation was something that the consumer would want to handle as this would involve an expensive lawsuit and that GCC would be seeking costs from the consumer.
The consumer described the debt collector’s tone of voice during this conversation as rude, disrespectful, and condescending. The consumer terminated the call.
The complaint alleged that a different collector from Global Credit & Collection Corp. called a co-worker on February 11, 2009 despite being told not to. The woman calling from GCC allegedly told the co-worker that she had “just spoken with someone in payroll.” The co-worker then transferred the call to the foster care agency’s executive director.
The consumer alleged that the debt collector asked the executive director whether the consumer worked there and the executive director explained that the consumer worked there but was not in the office. The complaint states that GCC’s collector then demanded to speak with the consumer and the executive director identified herself again and repeated that the consumer was out of the office.
The complaint alleged that the executive director then told Global Credit & Collection’s collector that she was tired of people from GCC calling and harassing her employees.
GCC’s collector allegedly told the executive director that she needed the consumer to call her right back. The complaint says that the executive director offered to take a message but explained that she could not guarantee that the consumer would call her back as she was out of the office.
According to the complaint, GCC’s debt collector remarked that she had already left several messages and that the consumer does not pick up her voicemails. The executive director repeated that the consumer was not in the office and explained that she was not required to collect her voicemail when she was not working.
The complaint alleged that GCC’s representative asked the executive director whether the consumer was allowed to get personal calls at work.
The executive director allegedly replied that, although personal calls were allowed, she didn’t feel her staff should have to be harassed by GCC’s first collector and accused of lying to him.
GCC’s collection agent allegedly then demanded to know if she could serve consumer with papers at the office and the executive director told her that she could not do so and that she’d have to serve the consumer at her home. The executive director refused the agent’s request and explained that it was against the law for her to give out personal information.
According to the complaint, the executive director instructed GCC’s debt collector to stop calling the consumer’s workplace.
The consumer alleged that she received a message from her co-workers informing her that their executive director had just gotten off the phone with the GCC supervisor and that the director was very upset and that the consumer should call the office. The consumer had hoped that the executive director would not become aware of or become involved in the situation. The consumer profusely apologized to her co-workers for the harassment they’d suffered at the hands of Global Credit & Collections Corp. Then, she called her executive director from her daughter’s hospital room in Indiana.
The consumer had to explain her situation to her executive director who was by now very perturbed at having to deal with Global Credit & Collections and wanted their collection activities to cease. The executive director relayed the collection agency’s threat that the situation had “escalated” and that they wanted to “send a warrant” to the office.
The consumer said that she became upset, humiliated and despaired by GCC’s illegal collection efforts, became physically ill and suffered migrane headaches while trying to care for her daughter.
The consumer alleged that GCC’s male debt collector repeatedly called her workplace on February 12, 2009, despite repeated requests not to call. During one of these calls, the debt collector acknowledged receiving a cease and desist letter that the consumer had sent a few days earlier.
The consumer said that GCC’s collector threatened her that he wold no longer participate in voluntary resolution of the debt and continued by threatening to escalate the matter by forwarding it to an attorney company in Minnesota and to have her addressed formally in a legal fashion. According to the consumer, the debt collector threatened her to consider what she’d done and demanded that she resolve the matter and gave her 24 hours to resolve the matter voluntarily. The consumer recalled that the debt collector stated that if she did not comply, it would be noted in his office that the consumer was not interested in resolving the matter in a voluntary fashion and continued by stating that whether the consumer could afford the payment that GCC demanded was not his concern. The consumer alleged that the debt collector stated that he was seeking voluntary resolution before the matters were addressed by the court division or court order and concluded by advising the consumer to prepare herself or hire counsel to address the matters for her.
The factual allegations in the complaint alleging that Global Credit & Collections Corp. violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act are just that — alleged facts. The alleged facts never were proven in court.
If you are receiving calls from Global Credit & Collections Corp. or other collection agencies demanding that you pay a consumer debt, you are welcome to contact me by completing the Collection Agency Harassment form in the right hand column.
If you are Florida resident, you are also welcome to call my assistant. I will contact you to discuss your situation and how I might be able to help.
If you live outside Florida, I will try (as a courtesy to you) to provide you with the name and contact information of an experienced debt harassment lawyer who is licensed to practice law in your state.
(C) 2011 Donald E Petersen
All rights reserved