June 2018 - Page 2 of 2 - FREE CONSULTATION

Why Are Robocalls Getting Worse?

Posted on June 7, 2018by Admin

For any person with a phone, it seems like robocalls are becoming more frequent and more annoying. Despite the creation of the “No-Call” lists offered by many states, these calls have persisted. In response to this increase in calls, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), through its Chairman Ajit Pai, has recently announced that ending illegal use of robocalls is a priority of the FCC.

In March 2018, Ajit made an announcement that the FCC issued over $200 million in fines for these harassing calls made in the previous year. The problem is these phone calls have continued to happen regardless of these fines. In fact, according to the screening service, YouMail, approximately 3.4 billion automated calls were made in April 2018, which was up 900 million per month compared to the prior year.

In November 2017, the FCC issued new regulations which allowed phone companies to block calls from invalid numbers or to show evidence of what is referred to as “spoofing.” Spoofing involves the caller tricking caller ID into hiding his or her identity. The FCC has also issued a proposal in March 2018 which will create a database of reassigned numbers so that business do not continue to call the wrong people.

Currently, the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) regulates robocalls. The law dictates that autodialers must have the prior consent of consumers to contact them, and that consumers have the right to officially opt out of the robocalls. If a company continues to make calls despite the consumer opting out, they are doing this illegally.

Not all robocalls are illegal. Some can be used as a way to remind the caller about an upcoming appointment, flight cancellation or emergency notification. Also, sometimes these calls are also a way to try to collect on a valid debt. The problem becomes when the calls become excessive or even harassing.

The FCC has recently fined a Miami man, Adrian Abramovich, $120 million for 96 million robocalls he was accused of making in one month. The FCC has been accused of sending mixed signals when these robocalls come from “legitimate” businesses.

Student loan company, Navient, has received 599 “communication tactics” complaints that were submitted to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). One of the complaints stated that the company called one person more than 12 times a day, including contacting the individual’s past coworkers, friends and family. The complaint also stated that the company called the same number 14 times in a 30-minute time period.

In response, Navient, along with other businesses, have petitioned the FCC to allow them to be exempted from the number of calls they can make to a consumer. These petitions are currently pending. These companies argue that if an existing relationship is already there, then the consent requirements should not be as strict. Further, they say that the exemption should apply to cellphones, as well as landlines.

In March 2018, a federal appeals court rolled back a decision made under the FCC during the Obama administration which prohibited debt collectors from using auto dialers to reach cell phone numbers. In that past decision, the definition of an “auto dialer” was broadened. However, the recent legal decision ruled that the definition given was too broad. Now experts are waiting to see how this narrower definition will affect current regulations. It is also now up to the FCC to write a new definition if they wish to clarify what exactly an auto dialer is under the law. If the FCC chooses to make the definition narrower, experts worry that this will leave consumers not protected from excessive and unwanted robocalls.

Click here to read more on this story.

If you have questions on this topic or are in financial crisis and considering filing for bankruptcy, contact an experienced Miami bankruptcy attorney who can advise you of all of your options. As an experienced CPA as well as a proven bankruptcy lawyer, Timothy Kingcade knows how to help clients take full advantage of the bankruptcy laws to protect their assets and get successful results. Since 1996 Kingcade Garcia McMaken has been helping people from all walks of life build a better tomorrow. Our attorneys’ help thousands of people every year take advantage of their rights under bankruptcy protection to restart, rebuild and recover. The day you hire our firm, we will contact your creditors to stop the harassment. You can also find useful consumer information on the Kingcade Garcia McMaken website at www.miamibankruptcy.com.

Bankruptcy Law, Debt Relief, Student Loans, Timothy Kingcade Posts

Understanding the Deceptive Practices of Student Loan Companies

Posted on June 6, 2018by Admin

Over 44 million Americans are finding themselves in over their heads when it comes to student loan debt. It can be hard to see an end in sight when facing six figures of student loan debt following graduation, but for many, student loans are almost considered a “given” if someone wants to pursue a higher education. Private student loan companies are now trying to make it even more enticing to take out more money to cover these costs.

In the grand scheme of things, government loans still constitute the majority of what is borrowed. Currently, private student loans account for less than 10 percent of all student loan debt, which is a relatively small percentage.

Private lenders have been hoping for this to change and have been actively lobbying for legislation that would lessen the restrictions the government has on student loans, specifically when it comes to graduate students.

This legislation, known as the Prosper Act, was written and proposed by Republican lawmakers last year. It caps the amount of federal student aid graduate students can receive. This cap on federal aid leaves a gap between what the students are able to borrow and how much tuition costs. Concerns have been expressed that students will have no choice but to seek private loan options to pay for the remainder of these costs not covered by government aid.

The next step is for these private loan companies to make their product more appealing to borrowers. What better way to do this than by making friends with the borrowers themselves? Many of these companies, in fact, are now making their product seem more like they are a lifestyle company than a lender.

One such company, Laurel Road, has partnered with MoviePass, a movie theater subscription service. The company has announced that if an individual refinances his or her student loans with Laurel Road, that person will be eligible for one year’s subscription.

Another private lender, Social Finance, Inc. (SoFi) has made small changes to its branding by changing how it refers to its borrowers. Instead of “customers,” these individuals are now referred to as “members.” It may seem like a small change, but this difference in designation also includes invitations to exclusive “member only” events, like cocktail parties and cooking classes. SoFi brands itself as more of a social club than what it actually is– a private financial institution. In 2017, SoFi offered 323 nationwide member events for its over 14,000 “members.” The company also offers an app that allows its members who meet at events to communicate to each other through the app.

The Laurel Road partnership is just one example of private lending companies trying to rebrand student loan debt as something more “fun.” The problem is further compounded when these loan companies do very little to educate their borrowers on the terms of the loans. When borrowers fail to pay back the debt as it becomes due, many of these lenders have been accused of illegally harassing their customers. Borrowers have become so desperate to pay back their debts, in fact, that some have even resorted to game show antics to find a way out. Recently, a new game show called “Paid Off with Michael Torpey” has offered student borrowers a chance to compete on TV with the prize being having their student debt paid off. The series is premiering on TruTV in July 2018. Many have criticized this new program, saying it trivializes a very serious, growing problem. However, it does demonstrate what lengths borrowers will go to in order to get some relief from their crippling debt.

Click here to read more on this story.

For borrowers who are struggling with student loan debt, relief options are available. Many student loan borrowers are unaware that they have rights and repayment options available to them, such as postponement of loan payments, reduction of payments or even a complete discharge of the debt. There are ways to file for bankruptcy with student loan debt. It is important you contact an experienced Miami bankruptcy attorney who can advise you of all your options. As an experienced CPA as well as a proven bankruptcy lawyer, Timothy Kingcade knows how to help clients take full advantage of the bankruptcy laws to protect their assets and get successful results. Since 1996 Kingcade Garcia McMaken has been helping people from all walks of life build a better tomorrow. Our attorneys help thousands of people every year take advantage of their rights under bankruptcy protection to restart, rebuild and recover. The day you hire our firm, we will contact your creditors to stop the harassment. You can also find useful consumer information on the Kingcade Garcia McMaken website at www.miamibankruptcy.com.

Bankruptcy Law, Credit, Timothy Kingcade Posts

Steps to Take if Your Personal Debt Goes to Collections

Posted on June 5, 2018by Admin

When someone is facing serious amounts of debt, it can feel like there is no end in sight. Odds are the individual is fielding continuous calls from debt collectors, all of whom are threatening legal proceedings if the person does not pay the debt owed. However, certain steps can be taken to help handle personal debt issues and hopefully avoid a lawsuit.

1. Review the Debt in Question.
The first step is to review the debt amount. Do not automatically trust what the debt collector is telling you, the debt they are attempting to collect could be expired or past the statute of limitations. It is recommended that the person facing the debt collection action first examine the information provided, research the collection agency that is reporting the debt and see if any discrepancies exist. The debtor has 30 days to verify that the amount is correct after the collection agency has contacted him or her. Take advantage of this time and carefully review the debt before making any payments.

2. Dispute an Incorrect Debt.
If, during this 30-day period, the individual discovers any figure that is inaccurate or unusual, it is recommended that he or she report this and provide proof that it is inaccurate. It is possible that the debt collection agency will clear up any discrepancy and adjust it as necessary.

3. Be Aware of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.
Not many individuals are aware that they do, in fact, have rights when it comes to collections. Simply because someone has missed a payment and has fallen delinquent does not mean that he or she has no rights. The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act is a federal law that protects the rights of consumers against harassment and aggressive collection practices by third-party collection agencies. Take the time to review the law and to understand what these rights include.

4. Discuss Payment Options.
If the debt is valid, it can help to talk with the collection agency about payment options. At the end of the day, these companies would rather be paid than have the debt be discharged in bankruptcy. Talk with the company to see what payment options are available. The consumer should examine his or her household budget to see what can be done to make payments to repay this debt.

5. Negotiate the Debt.
Another option that many consumers do not realize they have is to negotiate the debt. Many debt collectors or creditors are quite open to discussing other options for payment. If the individual is facing extreme circumstances or hardships, the creditor or collector may be willing to at least reduce the amount of debt owed or extend the deadline for payment.

6. Know the Statute of Limitations.
Every legal matter comes with its own set deadline for when legal claims can be made. Every state has its own statute of limitation for how long debts can be pursued. It is important that the consumer research what his or her timeline is and know what actions affect this timeline.

7. Be Aware of the Timeline.
After the collection proceeding is over, the debt will stay on the person’s credit report for seven years. This seven-year timeline does not start from when the delinquent account was originally opened but rather seven years from the time it became delinquent. Being aware of this fact can help when negotiating a payment on the debt since a paid debt will be viewed more favorably than one that continues to remain unpaid.

8. Understand the Consequences.
It is equally as important that the individual know what the consequences are to leaving a debt unpaid for too long. It also helps to know what the consequences are of ignoring a legal action if one is eventually filed. If the person is sued, it is extremely important that he or she at least appear in court and respond. It can be tempting to just ignore the matter, but by not appearing in court, the individual is likely to lose by default judgment and could have their wages garnished.

Click here to read more on this story.

Bankruptcy Law, Debt Relief, Student Loans, Timothy Kingcade Posts

Study Finds Parent PLUS Loans to African American Families Can Be Predatory

Posted on June 1, 2018by Admin

College is expensive and finding ways to pay for tuition and associated costs can be difficult for many students, as well as their family members. When options are limited, sometimes parents resort to taking out loans themselves to help their children pay for the costs of a higher education. Recently, one such loan has been criticized, the Parent PLUS loan for its terms and conditions, and also the effect it has on the parents who sign on the dotted line, not fully knowing what they are agreeing to.

A study recently issued by New America reports that a higher percentage of low-income African American parents rely on the use of Parent PLUS loans more than low-income whites. The study recommends making the use of Parent PLUS loans off limits to any family of limited financial means and offering additional, and affordable federal loan options for lower income families.

Families often resort to the parent PLUS loans after their children have maxed out other federal loan options. Many of the features of Parent PLUS loans have given them the reputation of being a loan of “last resort.” The limits tend to be fairly generous, the underwriting limited and the interest rates high.

The repayment options that parents are given on these loans are very limited, which only increases the risk that the borrower parents will default on the loan obligation. By having parents take these loans out, creates a level of “intergenerational debt” that can be crippling.

An additional problem with Parent PLUS loans have been the fact that lenders have issued these loans without evaluating the borrower’s ability to repay them. Without properly qualifying the borrower, issuing the loan simply puts them in a situation where he or she ends up falling behind on payments.

These loans were originally intended for families with more financial resources and in higher income tax brackets whose children may not qualify for need-based aid. In fact, most of the PLUS borrowers are from families earning more than $75,000 annually, many of them coming from upper class, Caucasian families with only 10 percent of Caucasian families earning less than $30,000 taking out these loans. However, for African American families, one-third of these individuals who have ended up taking out a PLUS loan earn less than $30,000, which is the opposite of what the study found with Caucasian families in the same tax bracket.

Because of the high fees associated with these loans, repaying the Parent PLUS loans can be difficult. If the parent is already struggling to make monthly payments, few options exist for that parent when it comes to repayment options. Currently the only income-based payment plan is an income-contingent repay (ICR) plan. To qualify, the parent must convert the loan into a federal Direct Consolidation Loan, and the minimum monthly payment in an ICR is normally 20 percent of that person’s disposable income. The monthly payment may be lower, but the interest rate does not decrease. At some point, it becomes nearly impossible for that parent to get caught up.

The study recommends making these loans off-limits to families in the lower-income categories and encourages the Department of Education to allow students from these brackets to borrow more from themselves rather than resort to having their parents take out these types of loans.

The study also recommends no longer allowing schools to characterize these loans as “aid” in financial aid award letters. They also recommend requiring parents who take these loans out to complete counseling that makes it abundantly clear to them that these loans are their sole obligation and not their children, as well as explain the terms of the loans so that they are clearly understood.

Click here to read more on this story.