Debt Consolidator Information

On November First of 2009, financial institutions and other creditors were ordered to comply with the Red Flag provisions of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 2003. The purpose of the Red Flag rules is to mitigate and prevent identity theft. Identity theft could be defined as any fraud involving people getting particular benefits by pretending to be someone else.

Broad in scope, the Red Flag rules definition of financial institutions is any organization engaged in insurance, banking, or similar activities, and a good amount of the definitions come with leeway to expand compliance demands. Any consumer account involving multiple payments or transactions that is offered to organizations can be subject to the rules.

The rules in a nutshell state that any financial institution or creditor that may be subject to a reasonable and foreseeable risk of identity theft must develop an identity theft prevention program in order to remain in compliance. These programs should include identification of any activity that may be considered identity theft. They should pursue red flags that have already been identified, and should take action to prevent and mitigate theft. Finally, period review and updating of red flags are necessary to comply with the Red Flag provisions.

Additionally, the Red Flag provisions say that an institution’s identity theft prevention program should be managed and written by senior company management. Training and overseeing this service are required.

Identity theft is an expensive and disparaging issue; business and consumer losses came to about $56.6 billion in 2005 alone. But when one considers how harmful identity theft can be to a business, not complying with these regulations can be even more expensive and harmful. Potential losses, costly investigations, regulatory fines and potential lawsuits are all negative consequences of non-compliance. It seems as though their best bet is to follow the rules.

Mallory Megan is employed by a debt collection agency. She also writes articles on business, finance, the credit industry and debt collection.

There is no doubt that text messaging has become a major medium for exchanging information. Easy, painless, no speaking on the phone. No wonder that according to the latest statistics that have been taken there were almost 750 billion text messages sent in the U.S. in 2009, almost double the number from one year before. Actually, technology and research firm executive Jacob D. Almeida recently predicted that money transfers will be the top mobile application by as early as 2012.

Debt collectors have stayed out of this field for now; The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act was a landmark legislation that went into effect in the late 1970s and has strictly outlined how debt collectors can call and when. Seeing as this act is even older than a stereotypical “Saved by the Bell Cell phone” from the 90s, it might be due time to adjust the law. But analysts are saying that any change in this area would have to come from consumers seeking change, not collectors.

Under the FDCPA, communications with consumers require a notice that the text is in fact from a debt collector, which leads to issues with the 160 character maximum length of money transferring messages. Another hurdle is determining who will pay the message. There is no current way for a collection agency to know if a consumer has a plan that includes unlimited text messages; the kicker being that if a contact is paid for by the debtor, it is illegal.

Another potential hurdle for debt collection agencies is determining the ownership of the device itself. The debtor might be utilizing a company owned wireless device for example. Said company might be monitoring the usage of the device, which would lead to third party disclosure issues if there were communications based in text that discuss a debt.

Sadly, Congress has to vote on health care, the budget, cap and trade and many other issues first before it can get down and tackle this text message issue. So time will tell.

Mallory is employed by a debt collection agency. She also writes articles on consumer spending, the credit industry and debt collection.