Nominee Member
Posts: 16 
September 18th, 2008, 06:15 PM
Alchemy, contact their legal counsel:
[FONT='Arial','sans-serif']V.P. Strategy and Corporate Counsel - Suzanne Larouche[/font][FONT='Arial','sans-serif']Phone: 866.764.7688[/font]
[FONT='Arial','sans-serif'][/font]
[FONT='Arial','sans-serif']If you have told them to stop contacting you and you put it in writing, their counsel wont allow their company to continue contacting you. [/font]
[FONT='Arial','sans-serif'][/font]
[FONT='Arial','sans-serif']Also, I read earlier on this post a question of whether or not they have to follow the debt collection act. As a debt buyer in Canada, they are only governed by the collections act in a few provinces. I will have to do some research on which ones but I believe it is only Alberta and Saskatachewan and Nova Scotia. The other provinces dont force debt buyers to follow the normal collections act. If anyone has any issues with them, call their legal counsel or their other executive.[/font]
[FONT='Arial','sans-serif'][/font]
[FONT='Arial','sans-serif']
[FONT='Arial','sans-serif']Country Manager - Rod Hooktwith[/font][FONT='Arial','sans-serif']
Phone: 866.764.7688 [/font]
[FONT='Arial','sans-serif'][/font]
[FONT='Arial','sans-serif'][FONT='Arial','sans-serif']V.P. Strategy and Corporate Counsel - Suzanne Larouche[/font][FONT='Arial','sans-serif']Phone: 866.764.7688[/font][/font]
[FONT='Arial','sans-serif'][FONT='Arial','sans-serif']I also found the name of the collections manager from their website:[/font][/font]
[FONT='Arial','sans-serif'][FONT='Arial','sans-serif'][FONT='Arial','sans-serif']A.V.P. Collections – Marshall Spence[/font][FONT='Arial','sans-serif']
Phone: 866.764.7688[/font][FONT='Arial','sans-serif'][FONT='Arial','sans-serif'][/font][/font]
[FONT='Arial','sans-serif'][FONT='Arial','sans-serif'][/font][/font][/font][/font][/font][FONT='Arial','sans-serif'][/font]
[FONT='Arial','sans-serif'][/font]
Alchemy, contact their legal counsel:
[FONT='Arial','sans-serif']V.P. Strategy and Corporate Counsel - Suzanne Larouche[/font][FONT='Arial','sans-serif']Phone: 866.764.7688[/font]
[FONT='Arial','sans-serif'][/font]
[FONT='Arial','sans-serif']If you have told them to stop contacting you and you put it in writing, their counsel wont allow their company to continue contacting you. [/font]
[FONT='Arial','sans-serif'][/font]
[FONT='Arial','sans-serif']Also, I read earlier on this post a question of whether or not they have to follow the debt collection act. As a debt buyer in Canada, they are only governed by the collections act in a few provinces. I will have to do some research on which ones but I believe it is only Alberta and Saskatachewan and Nova Scotia. The other provinces dont force debt buyers to follow the normal collections act. If anyone has any issues with them, call their legal counsel or their other executive.[/font]
[FONT='Arial','sans-serif'][/font]
[FONT='Arial','sans-serif']
[FONT='Arial','sans-serif']Country Manager - Rod Hooktwith[/font][FONT='Arial','sans-serif']
Phone: 866.764.7688 [/font]
[FONT='Arial','sans-serif'][/font]
[FONT='Arial','sans-serif'][FONT='Arial','sans-serif']V.P. Strategy and Corporate Counsel - Suzanne Larouche[/font][FONT='Arial','sans-serif']Phone: 866.764.7688[/font][/font]
[FONT='Arial','sans-serif'][FONT='Arial','sans-serif']I also found the name of the collections manager from their website:[/font][/font]
[FONT='Arial','sans-serif'][FONT='Arial','sans-serif'][FONT='Arial','sans-serif']A.V.P. Collections – Marshall Spence[/font][FONT='Arial','sans-serif']
Phone: 866.764.7688[/font][FONT='Arial','sans-serif'][FONT='Arial','sans-serif'][/font][/font]
[FONT='Arial','sans-serif'][FONT='Arial','sans-serif'][/font][/font][/font][/font][/font][FONT='Arial','sans-serif'][/font]
[FONT='Arial','sans-serif'][/font]
Nominee Member
Posts: 8
September 19th, 2008, 06:48 AM
hmmm, thanks london50
if that is the case.... it may be time for a court challenge, if collection agencies are governed by the act (as we all know they are) in acting as an agent for the original creditor, it should go to reason that the same conduct would be expected of the original creditor( or purchaser of alleged debt.
also in the case of Aktiv Kapital, if thier primary business or sole source of income is from collections and there is no service or product they offer, they should be included under the act.
hmmm, thanks london50
if that is the case.... it may be time for a court challenge, if collection agencies are governed by the act (as we all know they are) in acting as an agent for the original creditor, it should go to reason that the same conduct would be expected of the original creditor( or purchaser of alleged debt.
also in the case of Aktiv Kapital, if thier primary business or sole source of income is from collections and there is no service or product they offer, they should be included under the act.
Nominee Member
Posts: 16
September 19th, 2008, 06:16 PM
The debt buyers position is that because they have purchased the debt and now own it, they are in fact the first party creditor and should not be governed by the Act. Similar to Visa, MasterCard, Rogers, etc as all those creditors are not governed by any collection act as the account is theirs. I am not saying this is right, but I am sure this is their position.
My thoughts are that the difference between the creditors named above is that they are all collecting on current debt or debt less than 180 days delinquent, while these debt buyers have purchased the write off debts which are older. As mentioned earlier in this thread, a written off or charged off account is still collectable by a third party collection agency or a debt buyer but maybe the collections act should state that any agency (regardless if they are a third party or first party) that try and collect charged off debts should have to follow the collections act?? If the argument is not presented this way to the collections ministries, then the Visas, Rogers, etc of the world would also have to follow the collections act and the government would never pass that legislation.
Question - how does an individual try and get the ministry to change collection laws?
The debt buyers position is that because they have purchased the debt and now own it, they are in fact the first party creditor and should not be governed by the Act. Similar to Visa, MasterCard, Rogers, etc as all those creditors are not governed by any collection act as the account is theirs. I am not saying this is right, but I am sure this is their position.
My thoughts are that the difference between the creditors named above is that they are all collecting on current debt or debt less than 180 days delinquent, while these debt buyers have purchased the write off debts which are older. As mentioned earlier in this thread, a written off or charged off account is still collectable by a third party collection agency or a debt buyer but maybe the collections act should state that any agency (regardless if they are a third party or first party) that try and collect charged off debts should have to follow the collections act?? If the argument is not presented this way to the collections ministries, then the Visas, Rogers, etc of the world would also have to follow the collections act and the government would never pass that legislation.
Question - how does an individual try and get the ministry to change collection laws?
Nominee Member
Posts: 8
September 19th, 2008, 07:12 PM
as i mentioned earlier, another notable difference between the parties you mentioned above and the buyer of alleged debts is that they do provide a tangible service to the consumer. rogers, visa mastercard etc have a direct relationship with the consumer (regardless of how dysfunctional or one sided it may be) whereas the debt buyer has not. just as a third party collection agency has provided no such service or value to the consumer. it is an entirely one sided relationship that the courts tend to frown on as draconian.
just a thought,
and although you say the gov't would not pass that type of legislation, there is nothing unreasonable about it. Consumers should not have to endure threats, harassment intimidation, extortion, and blackmail just because someone is a first party collector. the restrictions on hours they may call, procedures to stop harassment and everything else in the act does not protect people trying to avoid paying their debts but does protect to a smaller extant abuse. It allows a course of action for someone being unjustly chased for a creditors mistake or omission.
the credit reporting agencies are not in place to serve the public, they are there strictly to serve the interests of the people who pay their paychecks.....the banks credit card companies etc.
as i mentioned earlier, another notable difference between the parties you mentioned above and the buyer of alleged debts is that they do provide a tangible service to the consumer. rogers, visa mastercard etc have a direct relationship with the consumer (regardless of how dysfunctional or one sided it may be) whereas the debt buyer has not. just as a third party collection agency has provided no such service or value to the consumer. it is an entirely one sided relationship that the courts tend to frown on as draconian.
just a thought,
and although you say the gov't would not pass that type of legislation, there is nothing unreasonable about it. Consumers should not have to endure threats, harassment intimidation, extortion, and blackmail just because someone is a first party collector. the restrictions on hours they may call, procedures to stop harassment and everything else in the act does not protect people trying to avoid paying their debts but does protect to a smaller extant abuse. It allows a course of action for someone being unjustly chased for a creditors mistake or omission.
the credit reporting agencies are not in place to serve the public, they are there strictly to serve the interests of the people who pay their paychecks.....the banks credit card companies etc.
Nominee Member
Posts: 16
September 19th, 2008, 09:41 PM
I agree 100% with what you are saying and that they should be governed by the same act as third party collection agencies. No one deserves to be treated unfairly.
As more and more debts are being sold in the collection cycle by these large creditors, maybe all the provincial governments will soon change the rules to include debt buyers under the collections act as some provinces have already done so. After some research and reading the different acts, it is only Alberta and Saskatchewan that make Aktiv and the other debt buyers follow the same collection acts as third party agencies.
Who are some of the other debt buying companies in Canada and do they try and collect with the same harassing and threatening style as Aktiv?
I agree 100% with what you are saying and that they should be governed by the same act as third party collection agencies. No one deserves to be treated unfairly.
As more and more debts are being sold in the collection cycle by these large creditors, maybe all the provincial governments will soon change the rules to include debt buyers under the collections act as some provinces have already done so. After some research and reading the different acts, it is only Alberta and Saskatchewan that make Aktiv and the other debt buyers follow the same collection acts as third party agencies.
Who are some of the other debt buying companies in Canada and do they try and collect with the same harassing and threatening style as Aktiv?
Nominee Member
Posts: 7
September 25th, 2008, 02:26 PM
Alchemy,
If it has been in dispute since 2001, and you have documentation, why wouldn't you just send it in to the company? If your docs will win for you in court, then it would be enough for them to close the account and stop calling.
Of course, it also makes a difference what province you are in.
Alchemy,
If it has been in dispute since 2001, and you have documentation, why wouldn't you just send it in to the company? If your docs will win for you in court, then it would be enough for them to close the account and stop calling.
Of course, it also makes a difference what province you are in.
Nominee Member
Posts: 8
September 25th, 2008, 03:32 PM
collections101
I have a letter from MBNA acknowledging account paid in full and closed that I have sent to Aktiv, they agreed they would not call again once they had received the letter (a conversation which I recorded and now consider breach of verbal contract), they did stop calling for about 1.5 months but resumed in sept. they have been advised to take me to court, and any calls to my number will be billed according to MY rate
I just sent them an invoice this week
collections101
I have a letter from MBNA acknowledging account paid in full and closed that I have sent to Aktiv, they agreed they would not call again once they had received the letter (a conversation which I recorded and now consider breach of verbal contract), they did stop calling for about 1.5 months but resumed in sept. they have been advised to take me to court, and any calls to my number will be billed according to MY rate
I just sent them an invoice this week
