Monday, February 28, 2005
CREDITWRENCH, credit repair, and collection agencies
Truth is, the collection agency tradeline can legitimately stay on the credit report no matter who you decide to pay.You're better off paying the original creditor and not NCO. If you pay NCO
it will most likely stay on your credit report for the next 7 years.
Nor does it provide an avenue for the debtor to have the collection account deleted.
CREDITWRENCH and legal terms
An accord is an agreement by parties bound to a contract to allow a change of performance required under the contract, but does not extinguish the original contract.
For example: Say you took out a loan of $3000 and agreed to repay it in monthly payments of $300. At a later point in time you are unable to pay $300, but you can pay $150. If the creditor agrees now to take monthy payments of $150, that is an accord. If you continue to pay the $150 until the total amount payable is paid back, you then have satisfied the accord. Hence the term "accord and satisfaction".
An accord itself is an enforceable contract. And, if you fail to live up to the terms of the accord the creditor can choose to enforce either the original contract or the accord; it's their choice.
However, as long as you live up to the terms of the accord, the original contract is not enforceable.
A novation, on the other hand, completely replaces and extinguishes an original agreement. If the terms of the new agreement aren't met, only the terms of the new agreement can be enforced. There is no way the orginal contract can ever be enforced once a novation takes place.
CREDITWRENCH CEO Bill Bauer stating that an accord and satisfaction is sometimes called a novation is false and misleading.
Sunday, February 27, 2005
The newest from CREDITWRENCH
Saturday, February 26, 2005
CREDITWRENCH and credit repair Part VI
In order to give you an idea of how little CREDITWRENCH CEO Bauer understands about what an Accord and Satisfaction is and what it does, I'll quote an excerpt from a discussion of his:
Sometimes the A & S is also known as a Novation.
No Mr. Bauer, an A & S has never been known as a Novation in any court of law.
Tomorrow, I will explain the legal theories of an Accord & Satisfaction, and a Novation, and the distinct difference between the two. Once again proving that CREDITWRENCH Bill Bauer statements are false and misleading.
CREDITWRENCH and credit repair Part V
Bill sucks you in by constantly replying to your messages on boards,
offering to help for free. Then he says he can do more for his "cheap" service.I
fell for it. I thought he knew his stuff.He doesn't know shit.I had him for
three months..........
Another meaningless link, disregard.
Friday, February 25, 2005
CREDITWRENCH and credit repair Part IV
However, less than ethical operators in the credit repair business like Bill Bauer, John Gliha, Bud Hibbs, etc, purposely deny they are in the credit repair business, with the sole intent of circumventing laws that regulate their credit repair business.
For example, Credit Repair Organizations Act states that a credit repair organziation cannot charge up front for its services. CREDITWRENCH requires you to make an up-front payment for services in clear violation of Federal Statutes. This way they already have some of your money by the time you discover their far out credit repair methods are nothing but a scam.
CREDITWRENCH charging an upfront payment for credit repair services is a violation of Federal Law.
CREDITWRENCH and credit repair Part III
Since we've shown that CREDITWRENCH is clearly a credit repair organization as defined within the Credit Repair Organizations Act, destroying records in such a manner violates the provisions of said act. Specifically Sec 405(c) which requires certain records to be kept for 2 years.
CREDITWRENCH destroying all records of a "students" immediately upon the receipt the CREDITWRENCH material, is a violation of Federal Law.
Thursday, February 24, 2005
CREDITWRENCH and credit repair Part II
The purpose of the law is, not only to regulate credit repair companies like CREDITWRENCH, but also to educate unwary consumers of means available to them to correct inaccuracies on their credit record themselves.
CREDITWRENCH falls within the definition of the CROA as a credit repair organization because he advertises that one of the side effects of his "course" is improved credit. That is an implied effect and is covered under the CROA the same as if it were an express effect (Sec 403(3)(A)).
CREDITWRENCH CEO Bill Bauer stating that he is exempt from the CROA is false and misleading information.
Below are some meaningless links, ignore them:
CREDITWRENCH and credit repair
Today, in response to my blog entry immediately below this one, he stated:
people can and must force the information provider to remove their negative information from the consumers credit reports before attempting to get new credit
What CREDITWRENCH CEO Bill Bauer is advocating, not only in the above statement, but also on his credit repair web site, is to threaten to file a frivilous lawsuit in order to have negative information removed.
That is clearly credit repair, and identifies CREDITWRENCH as a business entity that engages in credit repair.
If there is incorrect information appearing on your credit report, there are laws such as the Fair Credit Reporting Act that provide for the removal of such inaccurate information.
CREDITWRENCH CEO Bill Bauer stating that he does not do credit repair is false and misleading.
Tomorrow, much more on this subject as it relates to Federal Laws.
More bad advice from CREDITWRENCH
That's the type of misleading information that people who are in the credit repair business would like you to believe.
Unfortunately, people who fall for such nonsense find out the reality when they go to buy a new home, a new car, or attempt to get anything other than maybe a secured credit card.
All lenders calculate a debt to income ratio (DIR) when considering how much you can borrow. This simply means how much debt do you have vs. how much income you have. If the ratio is too high, you won't get the loan no matter how high your credit score may be.
If you have an unpaid collection on your credit report, they must calculate that as part of your debt, pushing your ratio higher. If it is a paid collection, it is not considered a debt, therefore your ratio would be lower than if it were unpaid.
CREDITWRENCH CEO Bill Bauer stating that a paid collection is no better than an unpaid collection is false and misleading.
Wednesday, February 23, 2005
CREDITWRENCH and the FDCPA Part IX
Send the creditors some cashiers checks. Sometime it work, sometime itWhat kind of advice is that?
don't work.
CREDITWRENCH and credibility
Tuesday, February 22, 2005
CREDITWRENCH loses a "student"
- She would satisfy the the full amount of any settlements that I negotiated for her.
- At some point in time, when she was in a position to do so, she would donate $100 to the St. Jude Childrens Hospital.
She agreed.
Some days are just great!
Monday, February 21, 2005
CREDITWRENCH and trademark registration
Quoting from §906.04 issued by the USPTO, "use of a federal registration symbol that is deliberate and intended to deceive or mislead the public is fraud".
Now why isn't it suprising that CREDITWRENCH has committed fraud? Well for one thing, it's his specialty. He advertises that he does credit repair, but because he's not compliant with federal statutes in the operation of a credit repair business, he then denies it. He claims to be incorporated in the state of Oklahoma, however CREDITWRENCH is not registered with the Oklahoma Secretary of State as a corporation.
Those 3 things alone show that CREDITWRENCH is nothing more than a scam indended to bilk unwary consumers of their money.
More ugliness
Sunday, February 20, 2005
UPSET?
Email complaint
Have a blessed day!
The real Uncle Normie.
Saturday, February 19, 2005
CREDITWRENCH falsely claiming to be incorporated
So what does this mean? For one thing, it is a misdemeanor under Oklahoma statute to purport to be a corporation when it isn't registered as such. So no big deal, other than it's still a criminal act.
However, CREDITWRENCH CEO Bill Bauer is probably unaware of the more serious consequences of his falsely claiming CREDITWRENCH to be incorporated.
According to Oklahoma Statute:
Any corporation, association or organization whose right to do business shall be
thus forfeited shall be denied the right to sue
CREDITWRENCH, as an entity, has no legal standing in a court of law; CREDITWRENCH can't sue squat.
Additionally:
Every contract entered into by or in behalf of such corporation, association or
organization, after such forfeiture as provided herein, is hereby declared to be
voidable.
He cannot legally enter into a contract with anyone for anything. Including his credit repair scam which he is now promoting as a work at home scheme as well.
CREDITWRENCH claiming to be incorporated when he is not is false, misleading, and is a criminal offense.
Next we'll discuss his illegal claim that CREDITWRENCH is registered® with the USPTO
Friday, February 18, 2005
Why you should never communicate with CREDITWRENCH
CREDITWRENCH CEO Bill Bauer elaborated further as to why he subscribes to this service:
I want to be able to geographically track everyone who ever communicates with me for any reason whatever in case I ever need to "park in front of their house".
There is a way to avoid receiving any tracking e-mails that can ultimately put you and your family in harms way from CREDITWRENCH CEO Bill Bauer. The best way of course is to avoid having anything to do with either his credit repair scams, or his work at home con. For additional protection, I discovered another solution in correspondence I've exchanged recently with the principals of mailtracking.com.
Simply provide your email address to optout@MailTracking.com and CREDITWRENCH CEO Bill Bauer will never be able to send you an email through their service again.
Of course from a financial standpoint, your best bet is to avoid CREDITWRENCH altogether.
Tomorrow I will be providing further evidence of false and misleading information that CREDITWRENCH CEO Bill Bauer continues to post on the internet.
Thursday, February 17, 2005
CREDITWRENCH and the saga of nonjudicial foreclosure
Unsatisfied that this was a valid legal process, he proceeds, he claims, to contact 3 state senators who are attorneys, 5 banks, and a sheriff. All of whom apparently gave the same answer; Uncle Normie is making the whole thing up, doesn't know what he's talking about, braying like a jackass, etc., etc.
I thought surely someone in the above group has heard of nonjudicial foreclosure, particularly the senator/attorneys.
So I provided Mr. Bauer with the Oklahoma statute that makes nonjudicial foreclosure a remedy under what's known as a power of sale provision that is contained in a mortgage in the 26 states that allow for nonjudicial foreclosure.
Mr. Bauer then indicated that I was referencing old law. That the only available statutes on the internet were from 1999 and may have been changed. As I clearly pointed out, I was using the annotated statutes, the latest revision of those statutes, and in fact the statutes were updated on the internet just 2 months ago.
Now CREDITWRENCH CEO Bill Bauer begins to sing a different tune. But, because he doesn't like issues confused by someone stating facts, he next "consults" with an attorney who specializes in foreclosures.
Using legal advice CREDITWRENCH CEO Bill Bauer allegedly obtains from OKC attorney Don Timberlake, he takes the position that even under Article 46, a consumer has a right to demand a judicial hearing. Not only does CREDITWRENCH CEO Bill Bauer and his alleged legal counsel Don Timberlake fail to quote the statute in its entirety, they quote it out of context.
The relevant part of Article 46 dealing with the power of sale by the mortgagee is:
A power of sale has been granted in this mortgage. A power of sale may allow the
mortgagee to take the mortgaged property and sell it without going to court in a
foreclosure action upon default by the mortgagor under this mortgage
What CREDITWRENCH CEO Bill Bauer and his legal counsel OKC attoreny Don Timberlake apparently are confused by is the very next part, which states:
in a mortgage transaction involving the mortgagor's homestead, if the mortgagor,
at least ten (10) days before the property is to be sold under the power of
sale, sends written notice by certified mail to the mortgagee stating that the
property involved is the mortgagor's homestead and that judicial
foreclosure is elected, and files of record a copy of such notice which
contains the legal description of the property in the office of the county clerk
of the county where the property is located, the mortgagee must pursue
any foreclosure by judicial proceeding in a court of competent
jurisdiction
As such, we must now determine if the homestead exemption applies. According to Oklahoma Statutes, Article 31 section 5 paragraph 1, it clearly does not:
§31‑5. Homestead exemptions shall not apply, when.
The exemption of the homestead provided for in this chapter shall not apply where the debt is due:
1. For the purchase money of such homestead or a part of such purchase
money.
There clearly is no homestead exemption that can be claimed against the money that was used to purchase the property, therefore there can be no request for a judicial foreclosure.
Wednesday, February 16, 2005
Power of sale and Oklahoma statute
It has come to my attention, through a credit repair blog of CREDITWRENCH CEO Bill Bauer, that certain Oklahoma State Senators are unfamiliar with the power of sale provision under Oklahoma Statutes, specifically Title 46.
My appreciation of the wording of Title 46 is that it allows for nonjudicial foreclosure. CREDITWRENCH CEO Bill Bauer, however, indicates that legal advice given to him by three Oklahoma State Senators proves otherwise.
Although Mr. Bauer refused to provide the names of the senators involved, I felt it important to bring this matter to your attention. With all due respect, I would ask that you either clarify to all Senators that Title 46 indeed provides power of sale to a mortgagor, or ask them to pass legislation to ammend the wording to indicate that it does not.
CREDITWRENCH and the law
Not so if he planned on buying a home in Oklahoma. Oklahoma is a nonjudical foreclosure state. That means when you buy a home there you execute a power of sale when you sign the mortgage note. If you default on the mortgage, the mortgage company can foreclose on your home without ever even going into a court room. There is no judgment, therefore no judgment to vacate.
If you don't cure the default, the sheriff shows up and escorts you off the property which now belongs to the mortgage company to auction off. Now instead of building equity in your own home, you're trying to find a place to rent. And renting is like pissing away money.
CREDITWRENCH CEO Bill Bauer stating you can vacate a judgment to avoid losing your home in a foreclosure proceeding is false and misleading.
Monday, February 14, 2005
CREDITWRENCH and foreclosure procedures
Might also have some time to touch on some staunch supporters of CREDITWRENCH CEO Bill Bauer, like Kate Grayson? :-)
CREDITWRENCH and interest rates
CREDITWRENCH credit repair via bad advice
He claims in his message that this is his idea and it's copyrighted. First of all, you can't copyright an idea, secondly this scam as been around longer than his scam.
This scheme involves borrowing $1000 from a bank by putting up $1000 dollars of your own money as security, then using the banks money to deposit in another bank etc., etc.
So what's the bottom line? This scam was created ages ago before the advent of the FICO scoring system used today by all creditors to determine, not only creditworthiness, but as a measure of what to charge for interest.
If you're in a situation that you're considering using a credit repair method such as this one proposed by CREDITWRENCH CEO Bill Bauer, your FICO score is most likely in the 450-550 range.
With a score in that range, you will find yourself paying around 15% interest on a secured loan. Now keep in mind, you are actually borrowing $3000 using his 3 bank trick. Doing a quick calculation of 15% on $3000, and that's only compounding it once annually, you will pay $450 for this $3000 in loans. Almost 1/2 of your $1000 deposit wiped out in just 12 months to play his silly "trick". As you can see from the math, the trick is on you.
He say's that the cost of the loan would be offset by the interest earned. Wrong again. First off, banks do not pay interest on their security. Anytime you use cash as security it is put into an escrow account, not a savings account.; it draws no interest for you.
At the end of 12 months you lose 1/2 your savings and this type of account being paid in full will have marginal, if any affect on your FICO score.
Sunday, February 13, 2005
CREDITWRENCH 'S "fail proof" credit repair Part II
Print my 100 word statement in it's entirety exactly as I have worded it and distribute my 100 word statement to each and every company who has ever requested my credit report during the last two years.
CREDITWRENCH Credit Repair update
Saturday, February 12, 2005
CREDITWRENCH's "fail proof" credit repair method
Here is why it will always fail:
The entire scheme hinges on his statement that:
The FCRA states no such thing. In fact it states just the opposite:
Section 611 (c) states: the consumer reporting agency shall, in any subsequent consumer report containing the information in question, clearly note that it is disputed by the consumer and provide either the consumer's statement or a clear and accurate codification or summary thereof.
As you can clearly read, the Credit Bureau can, and in the case of obvious credit repair scams, will summarize the dispute for you.
The Credit Bureau's know much more about the FCRA than does CREDITWRENCH CEO Bill Bauer. In fact, he has stated in the past that he knows nothing about it, which should be obvious from this example.
Even though the Credit Bureau is entitled to summarize your statement of dispute, if you use the CREDITWRENCH method, you will likely cause yourself more damage and end up without any statement of dispute. Why? Because the FCRA also says they don't have to include a dispute statement if "there is reasonable grounds to believe that it is frivolous or irrelevant. Certainly CREDITWRENCH'S "copyrighted" letter is both frivolous and irrelevant.
CREDITWRENCH CEO Bill Bauer stating that the FCRA states that they must print your 100 word statement and have no right to change or modify it in any way is false and misleading.
CREDITWRENCH and the FCRA Part III
As an example of when and how to use this CREDITWRENCH method, here is an imaginary instance. Let us imagine that the credit bureau is reporting that you owe $10,000 and the truth is that you only owe $1,000 so you send the following 100 word statement in a letter which gives them two options.
1. Remove the listing entirely
2. Print my 100 word statement in it's entirety exactly as I have worded it and distribute my 100 word statement to each and every company who has ever requested my credit report during the last two years.
He then goes on to provide his "copyrighted" consumer statement, which in part states:
(Credit Bureau)...is falsely reporting inaccurate and incomplete information...In doing so, (Credit Bureau) is knowingly defrauding you...probably does contain false and inaccurate information.
This idea of asking the Credit Bureau to insert a comment that they would find demeaning, and therefore opt to delete the tradeline instead, is an old favorite of credit repair scams and has been around forever.
(Here you can read the full cached version that he can't alter)
Thursday, February 10, 2005
CREDITWRENCH, the FDCPA, and the law Part VIII
"...most of my students can easily rack up as many as 8 or 10 or more violations so the damages can easily run to maybe $10,000 or more per student. Once the student has sufficient violations they will be reported..."
As was pointed out by me on a prior posting, the FDCPA only allows for $1,000 in statutory damages per action, not per violation. And, under claim preclusion doctrine, you can't wait for 8-10 violations to accrue then file separate lawsuits for each violation, they would have to be litigated in aggregate.
Just more false and misleading information being provided by CREDITWRENCH CEO Bill Bauer
CREDITWRENCH admits to RICO violations
On this blog CREDITWRENCH CEO Bill Bauer has unwittingly admitted to a violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, better known as RICO. Because, as has been previously pointed out in this blog, CREDITWRENCH CEO knows nothing about RICO, he was most likely unaware of this flagrant violation. However, his ignorance of the law doesn't lessen his liabililty under Federal Law.
On his blog, CREDITWRENCH CEO Bill Bauer states:
The Wrench now has the ability to file reports.....(with) all 3 major credit bureaus. What this means is that by working with a major national collection agency who is interested in helping to clean up their industry our students will now (as always) be keeping track of the FDCPA and FCRA violations of the collection agencies who contact them in the process of collecting debts and will be reporting the violations to me and the contacting agency will be charged $1,000 per violation.
There was no obligation incurred by the collection agencies in the above scenario. CREDITWRENCH has no legal standing to collect $1,000 per violation in the above scenario, and neither do any of his unfortunate students.
However, he continues to try to sell people on his credit repair scam using exactly the tactics he describes above. The collection agency he mentions as wanting to "clean up their industry", and his "students" are accomplice's in creating these false debts and are as equally as guilty of RICO violations as is he.
Only a court of law can award statutory damages. CREDITWRENCH CEO Bill Bauer's advertisement that he is attempting to collect invalid and illegal debt is a clear RICO violation. And, is nothing more than a false and misleading attempt to lure unsuspecting consumers into his credit repair scam.
CREDITWRENCH and corporate sabotage
CREDITWRENCH, the FDCPA, and the law Part VII
CREDITWRENCH CEO Bill Bauer teaches his "students" that they can collect $1,000 statutory damages per violation of the FDCPA in a lawsuit.
The FDCPA itself stipulates a maximum of a $1,000 in statutory damages in a proceeding, and the courts have upheld this.
CREDITWRENCH teaching that you can collect $1,000 per violation is false and misleading.
CREDITWRENCH, the FDCPA, and the law Part VII
CREDITWRENCH CEO Bill Bauer has stated:
a collector can avoid being sued for past violation of FDCPA by stopping the collection process.
His statment has absolutely no basis in law or the FDCPA. That's like saying if you run a red light, and hit another car because your brakes fail, you can avoid being sued by getting your brakes fixed.
The FDCPA is a strict liability statute, and as such, a consumer has the right to sue under statute for any violation, regardless of subsequent remedial actions taken.
CREDITWRENCH Bill Bauer's statment that a collector can avoid being sued for a violation of the FDCPA by stopping the collection process is false and misleading.
Tuesday, February 08, 2005
Thanks Japan
Sunday, February 06, 2005
CREDITWRENCH, the FDCPA, and the law Part VI
Let me preface the following by stating the facts in question. Because, as we all know, CREDITWRENCH CEO Bill Bauer has a propensity to go back and edit stated facts to suit his own position, after he discovers he's wrong.
CREDITWRENCH CEO Bill Bauer states on the CREDITWRENCH web site:
He has further stated in recent days:Whether or not a collection agency is licensed in any given state or not is not relevant or useful"
a consumer has no standing to sue a collection agency that violates state licensing law.
If a state requires licensing and the agency isn't licensed, they cannot legally pursue collection efforts.
There are at least 2 violations under § 807 of the FDCPA when an unlicensed collection agency pursues collection of a contract in a state that requires a license to do so:
- The false representation of its legal status
- The threat to take any action that cannot legally be taken
There is abundant case law* that supports that FDCPA violations occur when an unlicensed collection agency pursues a debt in states which require they be licensed before attempting to do so.
CREDITWRENCH CEO Bill Bauer's attempts to hide these facts is yet another example of his self-serving, and uninformed cause, to make a few bucks at the expense of an already cash strapped and unwary consumer. His credit repair scam web site continues to publish this false and misleading information.
CREDITWRENCH CEO Bill Bauer is now attempting to embelish my statement to mean that I believe a contract is void when an unlicensed collection agency attempts to collect. That has never been my position, and there is nowhere that I have stated such a position.
Given the above scenario, assuming the contract is not void due to illegal content, the collection agency has a number of options to enforce it and avoid FDCPA violations:
- They can obtain the license required by the state
- They can sell the obligation
CREDITWRENCH Bill Bauer's claim that an unlicensed collection agency, pursuing a collection in a jurisdiction that requires licensing, is never a violation of the FDCPA is false and misleading.
CREDITWRENCH Bill Bauer's claim that a consumer cannot sue for a license violation is false and misleading.
*Kuhn v. Account ControlTechnology, Inc., 865 F. Supp. 1443, 1451-52 (D.Nev. 1994); Sibley v. Firstcollect, Inc., 913 F. Supp. 469 (M.D.La. 1995); Russey v. Rankin, 911 F. Supp. 1449 (D.N.M. 1995); United States v. National Financial Services, Inc., 820 F.Supp. 228, 235-36, aff'd, 98 F.3d 131 (4th Cir. 1996); Gaetano v. Payco of Wisconsin, Inc., 774 F. Supp. 1404, 1413-14 (D.Conn. 1990).
Saturday, February 05, 2005
CREDITWRENCH, the FDCPA, and the law Part V
Creditwrench, the FDCPA, and the law Part IV
I again pointed out to CREDITWRENCH CEO Bill Bauer, that in a successful FDCPA action, the plantiff's attorney fees have to be paid by the collector/collection agency; it's mandatory.
For his position against mine, he cited the case of VELASQUEZ v MIDWEST BILLING SERVICES. The problem with his case cite is it was overturned on appeal.
On appeal, the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals made the following comment:
"This court has held previously that the award of attorney's fees to plaintiffs for a debt collector's violation of "any provision" of the FDCPA is mandatory. The plaintiffs have brought a "successful action" under the FDCPA and thus are entitled to a "reasonable attorney's fee."
As you can plainly read, CREDITWRENCH CEO Bill Bauer's position of your having to pay attorney fees in a successful FDCPA is false and misleading.
Not only that, he quotes invalid case law to support his erroneous position. Because, according to him, he does not subscribe to any reporting service that would allow him up-to-date access to the latest court decisions. Instead he depends on what he finds on the internet. Unfortunately for anyone depending on his advice, cases published on the internet are not necessarily the most current. As was clearly the case of the overturned decision he cited to support his aforementioned position on attorney fees in FDCPA litigation.
Friday, February 04, 2005
CREDITWRENCH, the FDCPA, and the law Part III
Take for example a collection agency who attempts to collect and isn't licensed when the state requires it. CREDITWRENCH CEO Bill Bauer is completely unaware of the fact that that is an FDCPA violation. If your state has it's own collection statutes, it is most likely a violation of the states law as well.
Additionally, since the courts have ruled that reporting a deliquency constitutes collection activity, and if this tradeline is showing up on all 3 bureau reports, you would have 3 additional causes of action. That's a total of up to 5 causes of action for violations that CREDITWRENCH CEO Bill Bauer admittedly isn't even aware of.
He is also unaware that most attorney's who specialize in FDCPA violations will provide an intial consultation free of charge.
Just more valid reasons why you should consult legal counsel rather than CREDITWRENCH.
Creditwrench, the FDCPA, and the law Part II
in the event that a debt collector fails to comply with state law the citizen has no legal recourse or right to bring action against the collector because it is the state who is the injured party and not the citizen.
The truth is, if a collector violates state law, they have violated the FDCPA.
The FDCPA prohibits the use of debt collection practices that violate state law. Federal District and Appeals courts have both been consistant in ruling that any violation of state law in collection efforts, constitutes a violation of the FDCPA.
CREDITWRENCH CEO Bill Bauers statement that a citizen has no legal recourse or right to bring action against a collector for state law violations is false and misleading.
Thursday, February 03, 2005
CREDITWRENCH, the FDCPA, and the law
For your protection, this is why the Oklahoma Superior Court takes a dim view on the unlicensed practice of law. If he teaches his students to sue on FDCPA violations, but indicates to them that pro se can avoid attorney fees, he has made a grevious error on a matter of law.
In a successful FDCPA suit, the court must award the plaintiff's attorney fees. It is mandatory. This is true even if the court does not award you damages of any kind.
If you believe your rights have been violated by a collection agency, contact an attorney for a free initial consultation. If you have a viable cause of action, the attorney will tell you so. If your action succeeds, the court will order the collection agency to pay your attorney fees. (And, contrary to what CREDITWRENCH CEO Bill Bauer will most likely tell you, the awarding of attorney fees in a successful FDCPA action is not up to the courts discretion.)
As you can see, given the above scenario, it costs you nothing for competent legal counsel. On the other hand, if you use CREDITWRENCH, not only will you be charged for the bad advice, you'll be standing before a judge without legal counsel that you could have had for free.
CREDITWRENCH on licensing
"Whether or not a collection agency is licensed in any given state or not is not relevant or useful"
Such a statement stems from Bill Bauer's obvious lack of understanding of both the FDCPA and supporting case law. And, is false and misleading.
In fact it's very relevant and useful to know if a collection agency is licensed in a state they are trying to collect in. If a state requires licensing and the agency isn't licensed, they cannot legally pursue collection efforts. If they do so, they have violated § 807(2)(a) by misrepresenting the legal status of the debt.
CREDITWRENCH message board
Additionally, he is posting questions received by him on another message board to get answers. The problem with doing this is how does he know he's giving the right answer if he doesn't know what the right answer is? Quite honestly, he doesn't. But, as has been shown on my blog, he's been giving bad advice all along anyway.
Wednesday, February 02, 2005
CREDITWRENCH and the FCRA Part II
"That is a date set in stone by Congress and may not be changed for any reason whatever. If they do they got a big lawsuit coming."
However, today CREDITWRENCH CEO Bill Bauer, publicly admitted he knows nothing about the FCRA.
Two issues here. 1) Advising someone they have legal grounds on which to base a lawsuit constitutes unlicensed practice of law. 2)He's giving advice on the FCRA which he now admittedly knows nothing about.
CREDITWRENCH and the FCRA Part l
I suppose it's because the simple answer is in the FCRA that he didn't know it. As proven on this blog numerous times, he prefers to make up his own answers as opposed to using applicable laws.
Tuesday, February 01, 2005
Enormis results
"he is causing me to check out everything I have ever done"
And, although he goes on by stating:
"In the process I am also learning new things"
You have to remember that CREDITWRENCH CEO Bill Bauer is a proved liar. When banned from various forums due to his lack of knowledge, he attempts to hide his uninformed and illogical comments under assumed identities.
So even though he is slowly succumbing to the Enormis pressure of TheTruth, he is still intrinsicly a liar.
