What is the def: of "intent to annoy" from phone calls from debt collectors?

Question

I had a collector call 9 times in 6 hours. Is that intent to annoy or not?

Answer 1

I'm a creditor. Basically, if someone is going to pay, then they will pay. Sometimes they run into problems. That's not MY problem. Still, badgering them is not going to crap money where there isn't any. So I call them to try finding out if it's a temporary problem or if I'll need to expect to take legal action down the road.

Most of the time, it's a temporary problem and I do end up getting paid. It's a pain, but that's life.

Sometimes, I end up taking legal action down the road. All the phone calls in the world isn't going to change it.

If I called daily, I'd consider myself to be harrassing and annoying my customer, let alone several times a day. On the other hand, if they're ignoring their caller ID, then I'm going to keep calling until I reach them. Since I haven't reached them, there has not yet been any harrassment or annoyance.

Some companies have the mistaken belief that badgering a customer enough will make him do whatever necessary, including robbing the money, just to get the debt collector off his back. I've had one scream at me on the phone and demand to speak to my job's supervisor, and another thought he had every right to the minute details of why I was such a deadbeat in the first place. While reporting such companies won't make the problem go away right now, enough complaints will cause problems for them in continuing to do future business at all.

Answer 2

You are refering to Section 806(5) of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act that has to do with Harassment or Abuse.

--------------------
§ 806. Harassment or abuse [15 USC 1692d]

A debt collector may not engage in any conduct the natural consequence of which is to harass, oppress, or abuse any person in connection with the collection of a debt. Without limiting the general application of the foregoing, the following conduct is a violation of this section:

(5) Causing a telephone to ring or engaging any person in telephone conversation repeatedly or continuously with intent to annoy, abuse, or harass any person at the called number.

----------------------------------

There are a couple of key words in this section "ring" and "intent". It does say they just have to cause the phone to ring(i.e. call you), so you don't need to answer. However, it will be hard to prove intent with only 9 calls in 6 hours. If you never answered they could just claim they are trying to contact you at home. However, if they left 9 messages or talked to you 9 times then that could show their intent and you would have a better case. In the end it would be up to a judge if it is a violation of the FDCPA.

Below is the link to the FDCPA

Answer 3

9 calls in 6 hours -- Did you actually answer the phone? If they didn't actually reach you, calling that many times could have been an attempt to catch you at home.

Best way to avoid annoying collection calls is to pay your debts. Work out a settlement agreement -- get it in writing and don't give them access to your bank account.

Answer 4

Intent to annoy is limited to the internet, and if it happens on phone calls, then it must be without disclosure of the true identity. I hope you have caller ID. I refuse to answer any call from someone I don't know. After awhile, you will know the company name of the caller, and just let them leave a message on your voicemail or answering machine.

Answer 5

I would certainly hope so!