Sometimes, you need to read all the way to the bottom of an article before you get to the best part.
Take, for example, this article: Flexing their muscles, debt collectors see an opportunity to fend off robocall rules. The article is interesting because it was published on a mainstream media site and because it articulates the problems that the ARM industry are having with call blocking and labeling technologies. The article includes comments from Mark Neeb, the CEO of ACA International, while also laying out the arguments from the other side, including state attorneys general and consumer advocates. It’s one comment, from a well-known consumer advocate, that provides the kicker to this particular article.
In noting that while there are many responsible debt collectors in the industry, Margot Saunders from the National Consumer Law Center pointed out that there still are some bad apples intent on harassing callers, in some cases for non-existent debts, or by asking for money that people can not afford to pay.
“Debt collectors don’t want to be subject to any limits, and consumers need relief,” Saunders said. As for getting a hold of folks, Saunders added, collectors “can send a letter. It’s not like calls are the only way to communicate with people.”
I don’t think I’ve come across any collection agency executive who would say that they “don’t want to be subject to any limits,” and saying that calls are not the only way to communicate with people is nothing short of laughable. While technically correct, the comment shows a level of blind belief in a position that virtually nobody else would agree is helpful.
