Out of the blue a collection agency contacted my ex sister in law saying I was being investigated for fraud. I call the number back and it is to do with an old checking account closed 3 years ago. The bank apparently sold my personal info to this collection agency who is now contacting and harassing me and my ex inlaws (who I've not spoke to in years). I asked them to send me proof of this and if it was a mistake on my part I'd gladly pay it. They told me they were not obligated to send me proof, and they would garnish my wages, freeze my banking accounts, report me to telechek, file a lawsuit against me etc, etc. In the 3 years since I closed this account I had not received one letter or phone call from this bank or collection agency (I've had the same number and address for 15 years) I'm looking into sueing the collection agency but I want to sue the bank as well, didn't they violate their privacy laws by giving/selling my personal info to anyone. Especially since they never tried to contact me themselves.

You don't mention where you are located. I had a similar situation happen to me in Ontario, Canada. I enquired to a government agency that helps people manage debt and they advised that it is against the law for collection agencies to leave voicemail messages detailing the issue and to discuss the issue with any other person then the person that they have the claim against.

Good luck though. 4 years later and they are still calling. Still unwilling to provide proof that the debt is mine despite numerous faxes to them over the years requesting such.

One thing I did discover is that collection agency transactions can only stay on your credit rating report for 7 years from the initial debt date. It might be worth waiting it out.

They cannot garnish your wages or freeze your bank accounts without a court judgment and they cannot get a court judgment without providing you and the court with proof.

Tell them to screw. If they want the money they can sue you... and prove it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jenni1

Out of the blue a collection agency contacted my ex sister in law saying i was being investigated for fraud. I call the number back and it is to do with an old checking account closed 3 years ago. The bank apparently sold my personal info to this collection agency who is now contacting and harassing me and my ex inlaws (who i've not spoke to in years). I asked them to send me proof of this and if it was a mistake on my part i'd gladly pay it. They told me they were not obligated to send me proof, and they would garnish my wages, freeze my banking accounts, report me to telechek, file a lawsuit against me etc, etc. In the 3 years since i closed this account i had not received one letter or phone call from this bank or collection agency (i've had the same number and addres for 15 years) i'm looking into sueing the collection agency but i want to sue the bank as well, didn't they violate their privacy laws by giving/selling my personal info to anyone. Especially since they never tried to contact me themselves.

---

Nothing illegal about selling a debt and the information attached to it.

It IS illegal to harass people, threaten, involve third parties, not stop when told to stop.

Collection agencies do everything but threaten to kidnap your dog because people don't report these illegal tactics. What State? I guarantee there is a State Agency that controls this behavior.

As far as suing - you would need proof that the information given to third parties somehow rose to the level of defamation. I don't know that you have witnesses who will come to Court (if you decide to sue) and testify or other proof.

I think your recourse is reporting them to the appropriate State agency.

Debts are sold every day, that is perfectly legal. So was there a debt to this bank that was not paid, have you checked with the bank.
Often illegal companies find bits of data on people from the internet or they buy info illegally from all sorts of places. And they merely call and lie to people hoping that one in 100 will pay them before they are shut down and move down the road.

Legally in the US, after that first telephone contact they have to contact you in writing, and they are obligated to show you proof of debt.

Keep records of when you talk to them, and who you talk to.
Get a mailing address, send them a certified letter stating you do not owe this debt and that if they have any proof they are obligated to provide that to you.

To garnish your pay, they have to sue you in court, failure to provide you proof of debt within a time frame is grounds to get the case dismissed often.

If there was a debt and the bank sold the debt, then there is no grounds for suing them. Even if they just sold your information, unless they had a written policy at the time that they would not do that, they can sell your info.

So I don't see any luck in suing the bank.

As to suing the collector, do you have proof of the threats they made?

The debt I'm referring to is a checking account, I closed the account with a deposit making it a 0 balance. The bank says I then made an atm withdraw for 300.00 making the account overdrawn (they have yet to send me proof of this) I only learned this much after filing a complaint against them with the comptroller of the currency and the federal trade commission. Up to that point they wouldn't talk to me, with the fees the collection agency says I owe 2700.00 the letter the bank sent me states they want to compromise and settle it for 44.00. The privacy policy with this bank states it cannot sell rent or lease any personal information about a client even after the account is closed for any reason. I never heard the first thing about any of this for 3 years, I know the bank knew how to get a hold of me I worked there for years. If the bank "could" sell my info they should still be responsible for who they sell it to and the manner in which it is handled and why did they begin contacting my ex inlaws before contacting me? This entire mess had caused a whole lot of problems, you can't imagine. I'm in Kentucky and the collection agency is in New York.

Ok, the bank didn't sell your info, they sold the debt. Why they never informed you or waited 3 years to sell it to a collection agency I can't answer. Maybe, because you worked there, someone just filed it away and now, that they need money, someone else found it and sold it. That's just a guess.

But I still feel you have no recourse against the bank. If they will settle for $44 I would do so (just get it in writing FIRST). The hassle of figting this will cost you a lot more than that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jenni1

The debt i'm refering to is a checking account, i closed the account with a deposit making it a 0 balance. The bank says i then made an atm withdraw for 300.00 making the account overdrawn (they have yet to send me proof of this) i only learned this much after filing a complaint against them with the comptroller of the currency and the federal trade commission. Up to that point they wouldn't talk to me, with the fees the collection agency says i owe 2700.00 the letter the bank sent me states they want to compromise and settle it for 44.00. The privacy policy with this bank states it cannot sell rent or lease any personal information about a client even after the account is closed for any reason. I never heard the first thing about any of this for 3 years, i know the bank knew how to get a hold of me i worked there for years. If the bank "could" sell my info they should still be responsible for who they sell it to and the manner in which it is handled and why did they begin contacting my ex inlaws before contacting me? This entire mess had caused a whole lot of problems, you can't imagine. I'm in kentucky and the collection agency is in new york.

---

Not unusual for an out of State agency to collect a debt. You are misunderstanding debt collection practices and "selling" personal information and/or turning over personal information. If you were/are correct no one could ever hire a third party to collect a debt.

I'd personally send the $44 and get this over with. Maybe morally it goes against your grain but I would weigh the possibility of $2,700 on one side and a definite $44 on the other and go with the $44.

Did you ever go to the bank in question and actually speak to a person about this? Or did you just call them on the phone? Maybe that's why they won't speak to you as they have no idea who is on the other end of the phone. Try going in person and speaking to the manager of the branch. It may just be the wrong account and your account number got somehow mixed up with the real bank account number in question. Take your old statement of checkbook or cancelled checks to help verify your account is not the account in question here. It could very well be THEIR error.

Is the bank still responsible for the manner in which a collection agency handles your personal information. Don't they have a contractual agreement with them to handle the info in the same manner as the bank would?

Not necessarily. It depends on what's written into their contract.

Who should I contact to find out? Should I ask the collection agency or have my attorney contact them or the bank? The collection agency didn't buy the "debt" because they said earlier on the bank may take a settlement on this.my bank privacy policy says if they have a nonaffiliated third party do work for them they must go by the banks policies. The collection agency would be a nonaffiliated third party, right.

You would have to subpeona the contract as part of a court case. Otherwise they will not give you the info.

I have found out the privacy policy at this bank states that if it obtains the services of a nonaffiliated third party to do work for them, the third party is under contract to abide by the bankds rules and policies. So isn't this the same as the bank violating their policies? I've never done anything like trying to sue someone, but I really despise this place, and I worked there for years.

If the third party violated the bank's policies, you may not be able to hold the bank responsble. You would have to prove the bank was aware of their actions and did nothing to stop it.

Then why would the bank bother to have a contract with them if they are not going to be responsible for their actions? It seems like I would sue the bank and they in return would sue the collection agency for breach of contract as well,(I really don't care what they do). Example: If I got you to pick up my vehicle and take it to your garage to work on and you wreck and injur someone and they sue, could they sue you as well as me? Thanks so muc h for getting back to me

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jenni1

then why would the bank bother to have a contract with them if they are not going to be responsible for their actions? It seems like i would sue the bank and they in return would sue the collection agency for breach of contract as well,(i really don't care what they do). Example: If i got you to pick up my vehicle and take it to your garage to work on and you wreck and injur someone and they sue, could they sue you as well as me? Thanks so muc h for getting back to me

---

Only the bank knows why it deals with one company and not another. This is like asking me to guess what's on the top shelf of your refrigerator.

You cannot sue if there is no connection between you and the person you are suing. If the collection agency has violated your privacy that's between you and them. Suing the bank for what you appear to think is using the wrong collection agency is not actionable.

You are confusing personal injury law with debt collection practices. In the case you site - I'm driving your car and I'm in an accident - in fact I claim against your insurance and all responsible parties are named - you as the owner, the other person as the driver. But, again, it's personal injury law and that's not what we're talking about here. In the situation you mention there IS a direct connection between Plaintiff and Defendants. It's your car; they are driving. That is not the case, as Scott has explained, here.