Update on the 1001 Ways: 15 Senators Vote To Let Insurance Companies Kill Your Children.

I'll be back to the usual mishmash of songs, dumb jokes, stories of the Babies!, and obscure superhero references tomorrow, but for today, this is important enough to take over all my blogs.

Fifteen Senators Voted Yesterday To Let Insurance Companies Kill Your Children.

I don't know how else to put it. Health care -- access to health care, access to doctors -- is a universal, inalienable right. We in America don't treat it as such, but it is, and the sooner everyone realizes that we should all be able to get medical care without worrying about it, without having to decide whether to pay the electric bill or the doctor bill, the sooner our world will be a better place.

Too bad 15 senators -- who I can only assume sold their souls to insurance companies, and who probably right now are counting the piles of unmarked bills dropped into their limos yesterday morning -- don't care whether you can get medical treatment for your children.

Yesterday, the "Senate Finance Committee," (a/k/a Pawns Of The Insurance Companies) voted 15-8 against the "Public Option." That is, they voted not to have a government-sponsored health care plan that would compete in the marketplace with other insurance plans.

They voted that way despite polls showing that 65% of Americans want that option.

And they voted that way despite the fact that Senators and prisoners -- who are, as far as I'm concerned, moral equivalents -- get public health care. Senators can buy a "public option" that provides fantastic health care. Prisoners get health care at no cost to themselves.

So, to put it bluntly, 15 Senators think child molesters deserve better health care than your children.

And the Senate Finance Committee voted that way even though Nikki White died.

It's doubtful that you know about Nikki White, and it's even more doubtful that those 15 Senators -- who I hope rot in hell-- know about Nikki White. They'd have to stop counting their campaign contributions to notice Nikki White, in part because Nikki White is dead.

She didn't have to be dead. Nikki White had an illness, lupus, that is treatable and not always fatal. But she's dead anyway, because Americans would rather spend money seeing a stupid Diablo Cody movie than pay for health care, and she's dead, anyway, because Senators and Congresspeople would rather line their pockets than provide health care.

Nikki White was employed, and working, and taking advantage of her employer-provided health care coverage when she was diagnosed with lupus at age 21.

Lupus is a totally, completely, manageable condition, if... if ... IF... the person suffering from it can get a doctor's care.

Nikki White soon became unable to work, and because she was unable to work, she wasn't able to get health care coverage anymore; not being employed, she was denied health care coverage, since for some reason stupid Americans and evil, child-hating Senators think that health care should only be given to the employed (and not even to all of them.)

Nikki tried, unemployed, to get health insurance coverage. But she was denied coverage for her lupus because it was a pre-existing condition.

So Nikki didn't get treatment for her lupus, at least not at first. She suffered and struggled with it and finally she collapsed one day and was taken to the emergency room. By law, emergency rooms have to treat people with life-threatening conditions, so that's good to know, right? While Senators are rolling, naked and greedy, in piles of insurance company money like pigs in slop, they've at least ensured that you'll be taken care of, if you're near death.

By then, though, there wasn't anything they could do to save Nikki's life. Nikki died of a treatable condition.

Nikki wasn't alone in dying because she lacked insurance coverage. The Urban Institute estimates that in 2006 22,000 people died because they didn't have insurance.

Think about that, Senators, when you get up from your slop-money rolling: 22,000 people in one year died because you didn't want to provide insurance coverage. Think about that, Americans who spend $5 for a cup of coffee but don't want to pay anything to provide health insurance for everyone. Think about that, free-marketers who have no freaking idea just how an actual free market works (and that we don't have anything near a free market when it comes to health care or health insurance.) Your $5 cups of coffee, re-election campaign funds, and stupid blown-dry Hannity Hair are killing 22,000 Americans a year.

But it's not just that they're dying. I want you to think about how they are dying, by knowing what it was like for Nikki White to die of lupus.

Lupus is a disease that causes the body to attack itself. This disease, which is rarely fatal if treated, causes arthritis, a painful swelling of the joints, muscle pain and weakness, fatigue, sun-sensitivity, hair loss, rashes, fever, anemia, and headaches. It can attack the organs of the body, as well. Patients get swelling in the wrists, feet and hands first, and then it can spread to ankles and shoulders and knees. Back pain is common as fluids leak from the kidneys and cause inflammation and leg swelling, too.

Swelling in the joints where the sternum meets the ribs causes intense pain that makes many sufferers think they're having a heart attack. Then lupus can attack the organs and cause them to swell. There can be sores in the mouth and light sensitivity. The symptoms are worst in the morning.

Most people who suffer from untreated lupus die of overwhelming infection (probably cause the bodies' antibodies are all killing the body, not the infecting agents) or kidney failure.

So that was Nikki's life, for eleven years: Swelling joints, pain, rashes, sores in her mouth, organs ballooning up, leaking fluids, headaches, and light sensitivity, all of which was worse in the morning, so that each night, when she went to bed, instead of looking forward to the next day, she had to dread it.

Until she died, that is. Until she died of a treatable disease.

There was a way to cure her, and it's simple. It requires just two laws.

First, pass a law that any insurance company which does business across state lines must cover pre-existing conditions. They can charge whatever they want, but they can't deny coverage based on pre-existing conditions.

Second, make the same plan that Senators and Representatives -- those greedy pigs -- get access to available to anyone who wants to buy it, but means-test the coverage so that if you earn very little, you pay very little. If you earn a lot, you pay a lot.

Doing those two steps, which are very simple, would guarantee that everyone gets health care if they want it. Everyone. And we'd all have access to the same health care as the child-killing senators who don't want you to have health care.

Doing those two steps does nothing more than level the playing field between all insurers. It does nothing more than impose the same system that we have with package delivery -- where there are private carriers and a public options -- with student loans (private lenders plus a public option), with schools (public schools haven't ended private schools) and hospitals (VA hospitals haven't put private hospitals out of business.)

There is simply no reason that health care shouldn't be provided. There's no reason those laws shouldn't pass. No reason beyond Americans are greedy, and Senators are stupid, and insurance companies have paid off those who are in charge of getting us to that point.

So if you are one of the people who believes that there shouldn't be a public option, if you are one of the people protesting higher taxes because you'd rather buy a $5 cup of coffee than pay a little more on your tax bills, if you are one of those stupid, mean, greedy people who thinks things are okay the way they are...

... then take a moment to think about Nikki, and how she died. Then go drink your stupid coffee and see how it tastes.

In the meantime, EVERYONE should be calling their senator or representative and telling him or her: I will pay a little more for my taxes if it helps save a life. I am personally volunteering, right now, to pay an extra 1% -- one percent, one measly percent-- of my gross income if it can help fund universal health care.

If you'd like to be a one percenter, if you're willing to see one less movie per year and brew your coffee at home so that people like Nikki don't die in agony, then call your representative or senator, or both, and tell them I'll pay one percent of my income in taxes if it means universal health care.

And then call these fifteen people who would rather see your children die in agony than vote for a public option, and tell them that, too, and tell them you'd rather they save lives than line their own pockets or protect their own careers:


Max Baucus: Call Max at (202) 224-2651 and tell him that you don't want him to let insurance companies kill your children.

Kent Conrad: Call "Senator" Kent at 202-224-2043 and tell him that lives are more important than his re-election.

Blanche Lincoln: Call Blanche at 202-224-4843 and tell her that her website's claim that she's trying to address health care is a lie.

Bill Nelson: Call Bill at 202-224-5274 and ask him why child molesters get public health care but you don't.

Thomas Carper: Call Tom at (202) 224-2441 and ask him if he knows who Nikki White was, and why that's important.

Chuck Grassley: Chuck claims to be interested in ferreting out wrongdoing in goverment -- so call "Chuck" at (202) 224-3744 and tell him that 15 members of the Senate Finance Committee, including him, appear to be wholly owned by the insurance industry.

Orrin Hatch: Orrin said on his website that "we should do exactly what American families are demanding." So call Orrin at (202) 224-5251 and tell him to do that. Then remind him that 65% of Americans are demanding a public option.

Olympia Snowe: Olympia claims to focus her energy on "key issues" that matter to Maine. People in Maine: Call Olympia at (800) 432-1599 and ask her why she thinks you want your children to die just so she can get re-elected.

Jon Kyl: Jon thinks that you don't deserve the same health care that he gets. Even though he's elected by regular people, he thinks he's better. Call him at (202) 224-4521 and tell him he's not.

Jim Bunning: One Kentuckian dies each day because he or she doesn't have health insurance. Jim Bunning, "Senator" from Kentucky, obviously thinks that's okay -- call him at 202-224-4343 and ask him why he's willing to let his own constituents die at a rate of one a day.

Mike Crapo: Call Mike at (202) 224-6142 and ask him if he has the public option for his health insurance.

Pat Roberts: "Senator" Pat Roberts recently voted to give money to help people find housing. Call him at (202) 224-4774 and ask him how people are supposed to live in those houses if they keep dying of treatable diseases.

John Ensign: John Ensign, a horrible human being, is bragging about how he voted to let people die just so he could get re-elected. And he's smiling about it. Call him at (202) 224-6244 and tell him you can't stand him and hope he loses his health care.

Mike Enzi: Mike's website today brags that he's fighting to keep down health care costs. By letting people die, Mike? Call him at (202) 224-3424 and say that.

John Cornyn: John Cornyn claims he's trying to improve your security and pushing PATRIOT Act extensions. If I was writhing on the floor of an emergency room in pain because all my swollen organs are shutting down due to an autoimmune deficiency treatment, I wouldn't care much about wiretapping issues -- which is fair, because John Cornyn doesn't care much about people who are, quite literally, dying for health care. Call him at 202-224-2934 and tell him to get his priorities straight.


That picture above is Nikki White before her troubles. This is her after she struggled with the disease:

Tales Of Pro Se Litigants

Computers pulvis populus quod nunquam screw sursum (Robosigner, meet roboaffiant.)

Reddo vestri, perdo vestri contradicto ut jurisdiction. (Represent yourself, lose your objection to jurisdiction.)

reddo vestri quod vestri secundus caveo ero lost(Represent yourself, lose your second mortgage.)

Reddo vestri, owe centum thousand pupa (Represent yourself, owe $100,000.)

Reddo vestri, perdo vestri domus. (Represent yourself, lose your house.)

Reddo vestri, subsisto in carcer. (Represent yourself, stay in prison.)

Reddo vestri, haud securus inrideo vobis (Represent yourself, no money, no motorcycle.)

Can a debt collector say you're stupid or a bitch? (Hint: No!)

At long last, it's day... um... let me check. It's Day 20 of 30 Days of Debt Collection, which is now clearly going to take a lot longer than 30 days for me to finish up. But however long it takes, I'll plow through, because it's important to me that you know whether or not a debt collector can call you a chowderhead and get away with it.

The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) prohibits debt collectors from any kind of "harassment" or "abuse," and the law is pretty expansive in what it covers. So when a debt collector sends a letter to a debtor implying that the debtor "removed her head" when she received letters from the collector, and that she ignored her mail and her bills, and that overall she didn't have the common sense to handle her financial matters, that violated the FDCPA, as one could guess.

It seems to go without saying, but debt collectors also cannot tell your coworkers that you're an "[expletive deleted] bitch," either -- a conclusion that seems obvious, and yet occupied some time in the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, which ruled that a debt collector who'd done just that had violated the FDCPA, too.

In that latter case -- Horkey v. JVDB & Associates -- the debt collector in question tried to defend his actions not by claiming he didn't say any such thing but by claiming that the law didn't apply. What happened is this:

The collector called the debtor at work, and the debtor finally told the debt collector not to call her at work. The debt collector then called a coworker, and said "Tell Amanda to quit being such a [expletive deleted] bitch," and hung up. Then Amanda, the debtor, got a hang-up call, too.

The debt collector took the position that the FDCPA didn't apply because, he said, he wasn't talking to the coworker about the debt. Amazingly, the first court to consider this question agreed with the debt collector.

That was what the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals then had to straighten out, ruling that the debt collector's call to the coworker was governed by the FDCPA. What the Court said is this:

To state the obvious, Romero's message was “in connection with the collection of a debt” because the undisputed evidence is that Romero called Horkey's workplace for only one reason: to collect a debt. In that context, when he told Horkey (via Scholes) to “stop being such a [expletive] bitch,” Romero was not offering general advice about how Horkey could improve her disposition. He was telling her, crudely but specifically, to be more receptive to his entreaties regarding the debt. No other interpretation of the facts is reasonable and thus, as a matter of law, Romero's message to Horkey was “in connection with the collection of a debt."

Calling coworkers appears to be a trick that debt collectors try from time to time -- as happened in a different case, Miller v. Sentry Credit, Inc., in which Miller won $11,600 plus attorney's fees for a debt collector's violations of the FDCPA in calling Miller's supervisor... at home.

Miller got a couple of phone calls and messages at his workplace from a debt collector, leading Miller to tell the debt collector not to call him there. So the debt collector, in what can only be regarded as a "genius" move (note the quotes) called the debtor's supervisor, at home.

That embarrassed and outraged Miller enough to sue, and cost the debt collector $11,600+.

But at least he didn't call Miller stupid.

Also, would it be wrong to take Sweetie for burgers on her birthday? That's kind of fancy, right?

Those red chair confessions posted by Talbot's really got me paying attention to that store. You remember those, right? The cool videos with the people talking into a camera in their closet, or to a priest, and making vague-but-sexy remarks about how they'd done something and would do it again? Those were great -- and they also got me to bookmark the Talbots website and start looking through it from time-to-time.

Today, then, I began looking through it for a specific purpose: I've been thinking about what to get Sweetie for her birthday next month, and I can't decide whether I should give her a shopping day (I'd go with and help her, but she could shop and I'd pay for it) or just pick out the clothes myself and surprise her.

I've been saving all year, and I've saved up $500, and I'm thinking I could just give that to her on a Talbot's gift card and let her go pick out what she likes. But then I started browsing around their site and thinking "Hey, this ain't so hard. I could probably pick out a good outfit."

With $500, I could start with the boots, wingtip, stylish boots like Sweetie buys herself, for only $179:

Leaving me $321. Then I'd buy her a fancy dress, something she could wear to a nice place I'd take her for dinner that night, like the "Crepe Jersey Twist Front Dress" for $149:




Leaving me... carry the one... $172. Her birthday's in November, so she'll need something warmer to wear, like the "Flyaway Cardigan," at $99,



and I've still got $73 left for some extras, like the $49 Rhinestone Cluster Brooch




and a $34 Feather Waist Sash...




...and, I'm over budget. Would it be wrong to borrow money from Sweetie to buy her birthday presents?

Cross-Pollinization, and A Blatant Attempt to Win A Contest

READ MY BLOGS ON YOUR KINDLE! For as little as 99 cents a month, you'll be subscribed to ongoing serials, humorous stories, and others. Act now and get 14 days free! Click here for more information.



The weekly round-up of What I'm Writing & What I'm Reading...

What I'm Writing:

Okay, I haven't updated it in a while, but there'll be some big news on there soon. Should writers blog about their adventures in publishing? It doesn't matter what you say -- I'll do it anyway. (AAAUGGGH!)

We're up to Day 19 of 30 Days of Debt Collection: The only 30 day period that lasts, at this point, well into two months. (Family and Consumer Law: The Blog)

Joe wakes up in the hospital, screaming. And not because of his insurance co-pay! No, it's because he thought he might rule the world with the magic power he siphoned from the sun, in my short (?) story "The End Of Light." (AfterDark.)

Samson falls to earth, but unfortunately, lands in Tampa, surrounded by Valkyries. (Lesbian Zombies Are Taking Over The World!)

Jeepers Creepers! That's the fourth best Actual Horror Movie Monster, a topic I've been delving into in September. That and Miniature T-Rex's. (The Best of Everything.)

When water comes to life... my story ends: The epilogue to Up So Floating wraps up the story of Sarah and Bumpy's year by revealing how Sarah and Peyton met. (5 Pages)

The Boy And I Take On Event 3 In the Septathlon: How will this contest between two legends of sports end? Probably with us both eating Snickers and watching TV. But until then, it's thrilling! (Thinking The Lions)

What I'm Reading:

I mentioned a while back that I like to get mp3s off of Muruch. She's now also not just posting great music, but running 5 contests to give away CDs for FREE, just by you leaving a comment. So go enter, but remember: I should win at least one because I'm blogging about it. (Muruch)

I don't know why I like it, but I do. I've started reading Gawker, even though I don't live in Manhattan and the only time I was there, I walked around in an "I HEART NY" shirt and took pictures of flower stands. And I'd do it again, in a second. (Gawker.)

My Scribd friend of the week is Marco Tulio Pettinato, a dentist in Brazil who not only provides helpful tips on oral hygiene, but also writes, A LOT. I don't speak Portuguese, so I can't read a lot of what he writes, but I know he's brilliant, because he chose to follow me on Scribd. So if you speak Portuguese, or have teeth, check out Marco's site. It looks like that picture to the right there:





Did you know a short horror story of mine, Don't Eat My Face, will appear in the upcoming anthology "Harvest Hill," available next fall from Graveside Tales? Go to their site to find out more and order your copy! And don't forget to read my other horror stories on AfterDark.





Check out all my free stuff on Scribd:

Eclipse: Claudius wanted to be the first man to reach the stars, and maybe he was. Or maybe things went horribly, murderously, wrong.

Up So Down: When Sarah's fiance drowns under mysterious circumstances on the night of his bachelor party, she copes by joining a group trying to prove there's a serial killer at work. Her brother copes by moving to Las Vegas and becoming rich.

Lesbian Zombies Are Taking Over The World! In the future, everyone will eat squid jerky, and only Rachel, queen of the lesbian zombies, can prevent Armageddon.

Interesting Judicial Comments, 6

Sometimes, judges let their personal opinions seep into their judicial opinions, as Judge Easterbrook of the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals does here, in deciding on whether a contract for arbitration should be enforced:

People are free to opt for bargain-basement adjudication--or, for that matter, bargain-basement tax preparation services; air carriers that pack passengers like sardines but charge less; and black-and-white television.

I wonder which airline the judge had just flown?

Plus, I could watch the Indy 500 live, right?

Sweetie and I may decide to move, next year, to a smaller house. Once The Boy goes off to college, it'll be us and the Babies! and we don't need the giant place we've got now. Plus, it's an older house with a lot of maintenance.

I've started looking around for builders and communities, just in case, and doing that made me regret that I don't live in Indianapolis.

That may seem a non sequitur, but it's not. In searching for builders, I came across a site advertising Adams & Marshall Homes, an Indianapolis New Home Builders company. Adams & Marshall's site is easy to navigate and full of helpful information like a blog by their company, but more than that, they've got listings and maps of the communities they build in, and floor plans and renderings of the houses they build.

And what houses! These Indianapolis New Home Builders advertise something called a "maintenance free" house (that's the dream!), locating houses in Indianapolis Maintained Communities where they build energy-saver homes that require little maintenance, and the communities provide lawn care in the summer and snow removal in the winter.

A new house, with no snow shoveling or lawn mowing -- it's almost enough to make me move to Indianapolis, except the commute would drive me nuts.

The site notes that Adams & Marshall is Indiana’s #1 provider of leisure living, but it looks to me like they're the number one provider of great houses. I spent a good 15 minutes going over the floor plans and communities and thinking to myself how great it'd be if I could take advantage of their company.

The weekly roundup of what I'm writing, and what I'm reading:

What I'm Writing:

I'm not ashamed to admit I was scared, because I'm the expert on scary movie monsters, including my posting of the second Best Horror Movie Monster ever. (The Best of Everything)

Joe can help them, or rule them. I wonder which he'll choose, as the end of the world nears... (AfterDark).

I can't believe it got published, or that 5,000 people bought it. Read the first of the reviews of Books You Didn't Know You Didn't Need (Aaaugh!)

Flying saucers vs. zombies and valkyries: Now, why isn't that a book? Because it's a blog. (Lesbian Zombies Are Taking Over The World!)

And then she hugged him. At the end of Bumpy's day in New York City, he gets a surprise. (5 Pages)

Only a lawyer could make 30 days take longer than 30 days. "30 Days of Debt Collection" continues; the most recent installment discusses whether YOUR bounced check is the debt collector's problem. (Family and Consumer Law: The Blog.)

Biker Babies! and Kids Names: Thinking The Lions explores the issues you care about. And also talks about a bunch of inane stuff. (Thinking The Lions)

What I'm Reading:

Next, I plan to find out what all the fuss is about "electricity." I know I'm a little late to this one, but I only recently found out about Flying Spaghetti Monster. (Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.)

SCRIBD Friend of the Week: Did you know you can download, for free, a bunch of stuff I write? It's true -- find them all on Scribd, just like my SCRIBD friend of the week, eBajana. eBajana has degrees in political science and oil painting, as well as a Masters in Urban Planning, which I think qualifies him to design the most artistic city ever. Working as a city planner, he's also at work on the first book of action/adventure series, so look him up on Scribd and check out his writing, and while you're there, read for free:

Up So Down: When Sarah's fiance drowns under mysterious circumstances, Sarah struggles to cope with the loss by joining a group of people trying to prove there's a serial killer at work, while her brother Bumpy responds to the tragedy by moving to Las Vegas to work as a writer and photographer. Click here to download it free.

Lesbian Zombies Are Taking Over The World! In the future, everyone will eat squid jerky and listen to their octopus, and the fate of the 73 dimensions will rest on the slim, sexy shoulders of Rachel, Queen of the Lesbian Zombies. (Click here to download it free.)

Eclipse: Claudius wanted to be the first man to reach the stars. And maybe he was. Or maybe things went murderously wrong. (Click here to download the free first chapter.)

Maybe a better idea is to just not bounce a check.

Remember back when I began to talk about (on Day 4) what is or is not a "debt" as far as the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act is concerned? For Day 19 of 30 Days of Debt, I'll take a look at how something that wasn't a debt becomes a debt, and then gets the debt collector into trouble:

Bad checks.

Ordinarily, checks wouldn't factor into the FDCPA, because nobody's trying to collect anything. You go to the store, you pick up your BBQ Fritos, you write a check out, and you leave. There was only a brief moment there where you owed money to someone -- the store -- and then you took care of it.

But if your check bounces, it's a different story. Now, you've got your BBQ Fritos, but the store doesn't have their money.

If the store comes after you themselves, if you get a call from the convenience store telling you your check bounced, that, too, is not covered by the FDCPA (and here's why). But what about when the store hires some smart-aleck person to try to get that money back?

That person might be a debt collector, and should be very careful, especially if that person questions the honesty of the check-bouncer.

That's what happened in McMillan v. Collection Professionals Inc. Ms. McMillan got a letter that told her she'd bounced a check. The letter said "YOU ARE EITHER HONEST OR DISHONEST YOU CANNOT BE BOTH,” and went on to say that the “creditor believed you to be honest when credit was extended." It finished up with the collectors saying CPI “would like to give you this final opportunity to prove your honesty and good intentions."

Ms. McMillan did what anyone in that situation would do: She sued the debt collector for falsely implying that she was dishonest (and she did so without even admitting whether or not she'd actually bounced the check, a neat trick.)

The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals considered whether a debtor can sue for that kind of thing, and decided that, yes, they can -- the FDCPA doesn't let debt collectors shame or disgrace or mislead debtors, and claiming that they're dishonest when they might not be could be shameful, disgracing, or misleading. Implicit in the decision was that, yes, a bad check is a 'debt' under the FDCPA.

So at least some courts say that a bounced check could be a "debt" under the FDCPA, requiring debt collectors who try to get that money back to be very careful.

All my business knowledge comes from Seinfeld.

Remember that one Seinfeld episode where George, too late, came up with a good comeback for a coworker who'd since left the Yankees and gone to work for a tire company, so George flew to the tire company for a meeting with the guy to goad him into saying the same joke in order to let George give his comeback?

That episode highlighted two important things in business: One: think fast, and Two: Have face-to-face meeting.

George may not have been a great businessman, but he understood the importance of a face-to-face meeting, and so should you if you're in business. Sure, you can do a lot of business through email and video conferencing and telephones and instant messaging -- but nothing, nothing, beats a face-to-face meeting so that you can size up the other side and they can take your measure. When you're in business, after all, you're selling not just your products, but you. Whether your business is a law firm or a potato chip factory or ... I don't know what other businesses there are out there; those are the only two I can think of... but whether you make law or make chips, your clients have to believe in you, in your skill and your presence and your abilities, and it's much easier to convince them that you're worth the time and money if you're there in person for them, investing your time and your money in dealing with them.

That's the trouble, though: your time and money are valuable and hard to come by, and you may be thinking of slashing your office travel budget. If that's where you're sitting, then why not try for a Business Opportunity Grant from British Airways?

British Airways is helping you out by giving 100 companies a year of business class travel anywhere they fly. All you have to do to win it is apply, by September 30, with some information about your company and your 2010 objectives, including why a grant would help your business grow; win and you'll get all year in 2010 to make that plan a reality, with help from British Airways. They're giving away, in all:


British Airways airfare for 10 round-trip Club World business class flights.

5 free British Airways World Cargo freight shipments of up to 500 kilos to worldwide destinations

$1000 toward accommodation at Courtyard by Marriott

5 Regus Businessworld Gold Cards providing access to business lounges worldwide

And a Canon PIXMA MX860 Wireless Office All-In-One Printer

You can send your salespeople around the world. Your CEO can meet other CEOs face-to-face. Meet suppliers and retailers. Establish connections. Ship your products. GROW YOUR BUSINESS, all for free, thanks to British Airways.

So, who can I sue at that debt collection company, anyway?

30 days of debt collection goes on, and if you're wondering how I'm counting the days (which began on August 20) , I'll just say: I'm counting them the way lawyers count billable hours.

Boy, there's nothing like a joke about how expensive a lawyer is, is there? I'm sure all clients appreciate that.

Today, Day 18 of the 30 days, I'll look at some people who you'd think are debt collectors, only they're not... unless they are. (Remember what I said: a lawyer's job is to unconfuse you.) On Day 16, we looked at one group of debt collectors who aren't debt collectors. Today, we'll examine another group of debt collectors who aren't: The people who run debt collection companies.

See, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act includes, as would be expected of a law Congress made, some loopholes, most notably in the definition of a "debt collector."

See if you can spot the loophole. Here's how the definition of debt collector begins:

The term "debt collector" means any person...

Did you spot it? No? It's right there: any person. The FDCPA says a debt collector is a person, not a company. But the law says a company, like an LLC or corporation, is a "person," too.

So "debt collectors" can be the company that's calling you, or the person that's calling you.

Now, why is that important, you might ask. If you asked that, you're not a lawyer, and good for you.

It's important because the FDCPA limits the statutory damages that you can get to a maximum of $1,000. (I explained what "statutory damages" are here.) That's $1,000 per defendant, in many cases, so identifying more than one defendant can be important. So if ABC Collectors calls me, and I talk with "Tom," and "Tom" threatens to break my leg for a debt that's too old, that's two violations, each worth up to $1,000... but if I sue only the company, then I only can get $1,000.

So I could sue Tom, too, and add a second defendant to try to get another $1000-- $1k for Tom threatening to break my leg, and $1k for ABC trying to collect a too-old zombie debt.

But maybe I don't want to sue Tom. Maybe Tom doesn't have a whole lot of money. Leg-breakers usually don't. So who can I sue, or, more aptly, who do I want to sue?

The deep pockets, that's who -- you want to sue the people who have the money, and the people who have the money are usually the higher-ups in the companies. The bigwigs aren't making phone calls from a cubicle at 7:30 p.m. at night.

Unfortunately, you generally can't sue the bigwigs, because they're not debt collectors. Yes, they run a debt collection company, but that doesn't mean they're debt collectors as far as the FDCPA is concerned.

Courts have held that the presidents and CEOs and other higher-ups of debt collection companies cannot be held liable for violations committed by their underlings or their companies. They can't generally be sued, at all, unless they were personally involved in the violation -- they have to be acting as a debt collector to violate the FDCPA, and simply owning a company, even a company that employs Tom and his leg-breaking ways, doesn't qualify.

The secret is out...

They finally let us all know what was going on with those Red Chair Confessions, and I have to admit, they got me hooked...

Watch this:



See how I got hooked? That's a great set-up for a great advertising campaign. I wouldn't have guessed that it was Talbots, and I think the advertising campaign is genius: Setting up shopping and clothing and being stylish as something that's both naughty AND satisfying, dealing with people's guilt over indulging themselves when all we ever hear is "bad economy" this and "savings rate" that.

Plus, the ad campaign doesn't just address that shopper's guilt up front and deal with it: it turns it on it's head. It's not WRONG to buy stuff from Talbot's, it's SO SO RIGHT.

Talbot's, the store that ran these ads, should win some kind of award. I thought this would end up being a movie or maybe some kind of thriller on TV. It's rare that you see such a stylish, compelling campaign, and even more rare that you see a series of ads that then leads into something even more interesting, which is Talbot's "confessions" blog.

Talbot's is trying, it seems, to make themselves more relevant to today's shoppers -- in ad lingo, they want to be more "hip, modern, and affordable," but what that really means is fun and interesting and selling stuff you want, and they've opted to show you what they've got for sale in part through their "Confessions Blog" where you can confess your style and fashion secrets, like the girl that wears heels all the time to look taller.

Looking at their blog will likely lead you over to Talbot's site itself, like it did me, to see if Sweetie or the girls would like stuff from there. I bet you'll like it, too, and if you do, let me know in a comment which things you liked and what you thought of the ads.

As for me, I'm sold: I loved the commercials and I like the store enough to mention it to Sweetie. (It helps that it's affordable, too!)

- Be sure how to discuss Talbot's is changing their image to be more hip, modern and affordable; it's not your mom's store anymore!

What's My FDCPA Case Worth?

Time to take a break from all this mind-bending who is or is not a creditor stuff and look at the money again. Today's amount? $311,000 for suing a disabled man on a debt that was too old to collect.

The Billings Gazette reported in April, 2009, that Timothy McCullough should receive $250,000 for emotional distress, the statutory maximum of $1,000 for violating the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and $60,000 in punitive damages, for the trouble he went through after being twice sued on a debt that was barred by the statute of limitations.

McCullough was on disability, having been injured substantially, and although he tried to pay off his credit cards, he said Chase would never work with him. Instead, they sued him and he defended himself -- winning the case and getting it dismissed. Then, they sued him again, and this time McCullough got himself a lawyer, sued the law firm trying to collect against him, and won.

His lawyers planned to try to triple the damages under Montana law.

There's a few things to keep in mind in reviewing this:

First, all cases are different. Your case (if you have one) may be worth more or less. In this case, Mr. McCullough was sued a second time on the same debt, was disabled, and also was apparently harassed through other procedures beyond just the two court cases. Unless you absolutely are identical to him, don't assume your case will be the same.

Second, state laws are also important; most of these cases involve claims that not only the FDCPA but various state laws were violated, and in this case, the state law allowed $60,000 in punitive damages (which the FDCPA doesn't allow) and a possible tripling of the damages.

Third, this case helps highlight one problem with debt collectors: The debt collectors who were sued had no offices in Montana; they had lawyers who were licensed to practice in Montana, but those lawyers didn't live in Montana. I've mentioned before how important it is to be familiar with different laws in different states, and while I can't say for certain, it may be that the debt collectors just weren't familiar with Montana law.

And, third, this case shows the value of a lawyer. Acting on his own, Mr. McCullough got the first case dismissed. With his lawyer, he not only won, but got $311,000.

They tried to make me go to Rehab, but I said... I'd rather watch it on TV and get a good night's sleep.

I'm going to say something that will shock you:

I've never been a really wild party guy.

I know: Hard to believe, isn't it? You just assume that a guy like me, a guy that owns not one, but three funny ties, would know how to party it up. And yet, I've never been the kind of guy who would party like they do it in Vegas.

That's why I found the show "Rehab" so amazing and fun. truTV's Rehab is a reality-show look at what's billed as "the hottest party in the world's sexiest city." It takes viewers like me and you into the world of big spenders, hot celebrities, and partiers who know how to revel in style -- and it also expands to look at the previously-unexplored, but fierce, world of competition between hotel pool parties.

These pool parties have been getting more play this season as "celebrities" like Jon Gosselin and Lindsay Lohan attend them and promote them, and "Rehab" focuses on the biggest and the best, and lets you see what it's like not just to attend one of these parties, but how they get put together and what REALLY happens before and during them.

It premiered on September 1, and runs Tuesdays at 10 p.m. (9 Central). Here's a sneak view:



For a limited time, too, you can enter a sweepstakes and win a chance to party like a rock star at Rehab at the Las Vegas Hard Rock Hotel & Casino pool. Click this link to find out more and enter.

Watching "Rehab" makes me realize what I missed out on by not being such a partier in my life. I might have to start living life more like a rock star. I'll begin by loosening up my Curious George tie. Party on!

Weird Laws You Didn't Know You Needed.

How long would you say a state official has to correct an "obvious error" in a state record?

If you guessed one year, give yourself a medal. If you said Why do we need a law to state how long a state official has to correct obvious errors, well, you'll probably never run for office.

Wisconsin sets a one-year time period for state officials to correct obvious errors in "vital records." Here's the law:


69.10 Correction of obvious errors. (1) Until 365 days after the occurrence of an event which is the subject of a vital record: (a) The state registrar may return a vital record to a local registrar for correction under s. 69.09 if the state registrar determines that the record should not have been filed prior to correction. (b) The state registrar or a local registrar may correct an error in the record if he or she determines that the error is obviously inadvertent. (2) A person with a direct and tangible interest in a vital record may petition a court to order a correction in the record under this section if the state or local registrar with whom the record is filed fails to make the correction.

I like that the registrar has the option of correcting the record, but only if the error is "obviously inadvertent." So the registrar can't correct the record if the error was intentional?

Here's another thing to ponder: How obvious does the error have to be?

Dang it, Red Chair Confessions! Quit stringing me along!

I hate to say that I'm getting hooked on something when I don't even know what it is, but that's what's going on.

Watch this:



Okay. I'm not sure what just happened there. (Although I liked the "I'm gonna charge you for the hour" comment. Gotta remember that.) So I followed it over to Red Chair Confessions and found the "Church" video, and that one's got a girl saying she "did something she never thought she'd do" until she was "older, much older." Then she says she did it 8 times... and the whole time I kept wondering, "WHAT did she do?"

Just like I wondered it in the first one.

The site doesn't give any information, at all, and I can't tell whether it's some kind of marketing campaign or a "taxicab confessions" kind of site or what it's all about, but I have to say I'm intrigued. Watching the videos, trying to guess... what's she going to confess? There's a third video called "Momma's little secret" in which the "therapeutic" woman appears to be talking into a camera in her closet, and says that there's something she's been keeping a secret. She leaves before she tells, though -- and then the ending... well, watch it for yourself on their site, because I'm not going to give it away.

It's compelling video, interesting stuff, and keeps me watching, over and over, trying to figure it out. I'm not one for mysteries, usually, but now I'm going nuts and I can't stand not knowing what this is all about.

"Unconfuse" is now a word, and it applies to debt collectors who aren't debt collectors.

"Creditors", under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) can sometimes become "debt collectors" if they're not careful -- and the same thing can happen in reverse: "Debt collectors" may stop being debt collectors, even though they seem to be debt collectors.

The FDCPA defines debt collectors very carefully, and very expansively, in a definition that I won't quote here. ( If you want to read it, click this and go to subsection (6). )

Then, after saying who is a debt collector, Congress gave six exceptions, people who would be debt collectors except that Congress says they're not. Those exceptions are:

(A) any officer or employee of a creditor while, in the name of the creditor, collecting debts for such creditor;

(B) any person while acting as a debt collector for another person, both of whom are related by common ownership or affiliated by corporate control, if the person acting as a debt collector does so only for persons to whom it is so related or affiliated and if the principal business of such person is not the collection of debts;

(C) any officer or employee of the United States or any State to the extent that collecting or attempting to collect any debt is in the performance of his official duties;

(D) any person while serving or attempting to serve legal process on any other person in connection with the judicial enforcement of any debt;

(E) any nonprofit organization which, at the request of consumers, performs bona fide consumer credit counseling and assists consumers in the liquidation of their debts by receiving payments from such consumers and distributing such amounts to creditors; and

(F) any person collecting or attempting to collect any debt owed or due or asserted to be owed or due another to the extent such activity (i) is incidental to a bona fide fiduciary obligation or a bona fide escrow arrangement; (ii) concerns a debt which was originated by such person; (iii) concerns a debt which was not in default at the time it was obtained by such person; or (iv) concerns a debt obtained by such person as a secured party in a commercial credit transaction involving the creditor.

Some of those make sense, right? Employees of creditors shouldn't be treated as debt collectors, because they're working for the creditor, so, even though they're collecting money for someone else (their employer) they get a free pass. (Interestingly, employees of debt collectors may not get that exemption... but that's for another day.)

Some are more complicated than others, and I'm not going to explain them all today. Instead, I'm going to focus on the bona fide fiduciary obligation.

A "fiduciary" is, in general, someone who has to put your interests ahead of their own. A good example is the "trustee" of a trust. If you have a trust fund, someone (the trustee) manages that fund. The trustee has to manage it to make money for you, not for the trustee, which makes the trustee a "fiduciary." If the trustee were to start doing things like, say, withdrawing and reinvesting money for no good reason, just to generate fees for himself, that would violate his duties.

As usual, these definitions are easier to understand when given real life examples, so let's look at a "Debt collector" who's not, because of a bona fide fiduciary obligation.

Here's the set-up: Guy borrows money on a student loan, and defaults. Student loan lender then assigns the debt to Collector, which goes after Guy. We know already that would tend to make the Collector a "debt collector," right?

Guy then pays back the loan in full, but Collector continues to garnish his wages. So does that violate the FDCPA?

Maybe. Maybe not. In the case of Rowe v. Educational Credit Management Corporation, Rowe (the Guy) sued Educational Credit Management Corporation, ECMC (the debt collector) for garnishing his wages. ECMC said that they couldn't be sued under the FDCPA because of the bona fide fiduciary exception, and they were mostly right, because student loan guarantors are "bona fide fiduciaries" of the government.

BUT!

But... ECMC may not have been a guarantor. They may have been just another collector working for a guarantor -- which means they were covered by the FDCPA, maybe, after all.

Confused? I agree. It is confusing.

That's why you should always check with a lawyer. It's our job to unconfuse you.

Join Team Jodi...

As a practicing lawyer, I'm frequently called on to hire other professionals or find people to help my clients, either as an expert witness or in some aspect of their situation that I can't help. So I try to keep up-to-date with accountants and investigators and appraisers and real estate agents, because I never know when I'll have a client who may need a referral to someone I recommend.

My first contact with those potential referrals is most often their website, which can make or break the deal with me. A professional website that provides a lot of information and help upfront works hard to convince me that there's a professional person behind that site who can provide me (and my clients) a lot of information and help.

That's why I liked the Chapel Hill Real Estate website set up by TeamJodi so much. I had to find someone to help with some real estate issues in the North Carolina region, and came across Jodi Bakst's site.

Jodi, I learned quickly, specializes in the Chapel Hill and Durham areas helping people buy or sell homes, and they know and are able to provide help with the local schools, local rules about real estate, and more in their community. They have great information about the neighborhoods in which they sell, helpful market statistics, even SAT scores for the schools where you could be buying a home.

The entire site shows why they're the experts Chapel Hill Real Estate, and probably for all of North Carolina. I (or you) can quickly use their site to get information about Chapel Hill Real Estate, Durham homes for sale, and more.

And they keep providing you with information through their free system of automatic updates: You'll get new MLS listings with specified criteria, emailed directly to you.

I was impressed by their site, and I expect that I (and you) will be impressed by them. So if you're looking for some Chapel Hill Real Estate, click one of those links to check them out.

Cross-Pollinzation and The Facebook Friend of the Week.

Did you know that you can Kindle my blogs? And that people are already doing that? If you Kindle any of my blogs, email me at "thetroublewithroy[at]yahoo.com" (put "Kindle" in the subject line) and let me know, and I'll send you a free copy of one of my books. Just 99 cents per month gets you my blog delivered straight to your Kindle. Click here for more information.

What I'm Writing:

It's more than just an excuse for pictures of girls kissing girls... but there are those, too. Those pictures, and Rachel on the run from the flying saucer invasion of Valhalla, in the only story ever about a lesbian zombie and her octopus. (Lesbian Zombies Are Taking Over The World!)

Bustin' makes me feel good! and so did movie theme songs, which have virtually disappeared. But I'm bringing them back. (The Best Of Everything.)

Bumpy's alone in New York, and waiting for a call, or a visit. Or something. We're nearing the end of Up So Down... (5 Pages)

Joe The Magician is alone in his dressing room, and making Conan O'Brien's out of light as he waits for them to come get arrest him for ending the world before 2012 (AfterDark.)

NASA hates little kids, likes corporations. And it's tough to break into the publishing business without NASA on your side, as all aspiring writers know. (AAAUGGH!)

Debt collectors, and cats and dogs living together? We're halfway through 30 Days of Debt Collection. Do you feel smarter? I know I do. (Family and Consumer Law: The Blog)

I expect a lawsuit from Peyton Manning, or Sandra Bullock, any day now: But that's the risks you take when your no-holds-barred sports post, Nonsportsmanlike Conduct!, joins the poems, pictures of Babies!, terrible jokes, and Sweetie quotes as a regular feature. (Thinking The Lions)

What I'm Reading:

Not all of life's problems can be solved in a Ziggy comic: That's why I check out A Smarter Planet, the blog of intelligent solutions to difficult problems.

You say Amoh-bay, I say where've you been? What I'm not reading is Husbands Anonymous, a funny & interesting blog that hasn't been published in a while. Check out the archives and hope that Scott's doing okay. (Husband's Anonymous)

Facebook Friend of The Week: is Dara England. Dara writes fantasy, paranormal romance, and historical fiction, and reads the "Wheel of Time" series, which I only recently became aware of but which is apparently a big deal. Or not. I don't know much about it. Dara's novel "Brought to Life" was released just this past March by Lyrical Press, after she was first published in 2006. Which means, if you're a writer, Dara took your spot in the publishing world. But her books earned her that spot, so go friend her anyway. Or check out her website.

The name's... uh... Bond? Friday? Someone else?

I promised that Day 15 of 30 Days of Debt Collection would feature another way creditors become debt collectors, and, By Gum, I'm gonna deliver.

Remember, some "creditors" who wouldn't otherwise be covered by the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act become "debt collectors" who have to abide by that law or get sued, doing that by getting the right to collect a debt after the debt is already in default.

Other creditors become "debt collectors" through a simpler, but sneakier, way: They collect under a false name.

Remember, the FDCPA is there (in part) to protect debtors from being tricked or deceived, and if a creditor pretends to be someone else, then they're deceiving the debtor -- and, also, by pretending to be someone else, they're acting more like a "debt collector" than a "creditor."

So if a creditor uses someone else's name, that creditor can become a "debt collector" and has to abide by the rules the FDCPA imposes on debt collectors.

Sometimes, the use of a false name is obvious: If ABC Credit Card Company calls up and says "This is NOT ABC Credit Card Company," then it's pretty obvious they're using a false name.

But creditors can be sneakier -- or stupider-- and do things that aren't as obvious. Suppose you bought a timeshare from one company, and they then sold to another company, which then sent you a letter that appeared to be from yet a third company... that would violate the FDCPA, because it would make the creditor a debt collector.

That's what happened in Catencamp v. Cendant Timeshare Resort Group-Consumer Finance, Inc., a 2006 case in which Catencamp bought a timeshare from Fairfield, which then sold to Cendant. Cendant then tried to collect from the buyer, but sent him a letter from "CTRG," and in that letter said the money was owed to Fairfield as the original creditor.

"CTRG," as it turned out, stood for Cendant Timeshare Resort Group, but the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the buyer shouldn't have been forced to figure that out, because the FDCPA, it said, "does not require... either sophistication or guesswork." It requires, instead, that creditors and debt collectors let you know just who you're dealing with.

Point, click, protect.

There's really no need to have an insurance agent anymore, or even spend a lot of time looking up information yourself, not when you can get free term life insurance quotes online with no hassle and no real investment of time.

Just click that link, head to the Freelifetermquote.com site, put in some basic information that you'll know off the top of your head (like where you live and how old you are) and you'll get your quotes from top-flight insurance companies.

Term life insurance is not only smart, but necessary: if something happens to you, you want your family taken care of, don't you? Of course you do, and term life insurance is the affordable, smart way to do that.

Your lawyer joke of the day.

Time to take a break from serious matters and lighten up. It's the Friday before Labor Day, after all. Enjoy this:

A young lawyer, starting up his private practice, was very anxious to impress potential clients. When he saw the first visitor to his office come through the door, he immediately picked up his phone and spoke into it," I'm sorry, but my caseload is so tremendous that I'm not going to be able to look into your problem for at least a month. I'll have to get back to you then." He then turned to the man who had just walked in, and said, "Now, what can I do for you?"

"Nothing," replied the man. "I'm here to hook up your phone."

There's nothing "generic" about it, so don't make your baby pay for advertising.

If you're a mother or expecting mother, or are maybe planning on having a child in the next few years, listen up: There's no nutritional difference between store brand baby formula and the higher-priced name brands.

That's not just me saying it. It's also Dr. Barbara Levine, from Weill Cornell Medical College. Dr. Levine knows that all baby formulas are required by law to comply with strict manufacturing and ingredient rules, which is why she says "there is no nutritional reason to buy the much more expensive formulas sold by the big pharmaceutical companies. The quality and safety of the manufacturing are also inspected in same way by the FDA.”

That is, store brands are the same as name brands, but the store brands are cheaper -- sometimes as much as 50% cheaper, saving thousands of dollars over the time a baby is on formula.

That's an important point, considering that the government is changing the way programs for the poor, like WIC, pay people. The government is trying to save money by encouraging breast feeding, reducing (in some cases) the amount of money that is given to provide formula. While breast feeding can make good sense, if a woman is getting reduced funding for formula she'll want to get enough formula to feed her baby, and that's where the store brands come in, providing the same nutritional qualities as higher priced brands, but for way less.

I like the move the federal government, and doctors, are doing, encouraging women to buy more fruits and vegetables and breast feed more; it makes sense, especially when money's tight, to rely on the free source of baby food. But for those women who can't supply everything their babies need, I think it's important that the word get out that store brands aren't inferior, as parents shouldn't be spending money wastefully.

Creditors becoming debt collectors, dogs and cats living together...

There are, under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) "creditors" and "debt collectors" and never the twain shall meet, as they say.

Actually, nobody probably says that anymore. And that's just as well, because when it comes to creditors and debt collectors, the twain can meet. They can be the same person. That's the kind of crazy world we live in, all the rules breaking down, people putting Ghostbusters pictures in a blog about the FDCPA. Weird stuff.

A "creditor" under the FDCPA is the person who you borrowed the money from in the first place. They're not covered by any of the FDPCA's rules, as a general matter. A "debt collector" is a more complicated definition, one I already explored here. Debt collectors are covered by the FDCPA, as you'd expect.

The reasons why creditors aren't covered by the FDCPA might be many; the most common reason given is that creditors don't have any incentive to harass you or trouble you or bother you. "Creditors," courts and congress say, don't want to harass you because they're in a relationship with you. They lent you money and you agreed to pay it back and you're all happy together (cue music) so why would a creditor bother you by calling you early in the morning, or calling your mother-in-law, or trying to collect money it's not actually owed?

I think you can see what I think of that rule. That reasoning, that a creditor wouldn't do anything wrong because they want to keep up the relationship with you, goes out the door if you have defaulted on your debt, or if you never owed the money in the first place. Once I stop paying my Best Buy credit card, why should Best Buy care about how it treats me? Best Buy doesn't want my business back, because I'm the kind of customer who takes out a credit card and stops paying it.

In that example, which hasn't happened-- I pay my Best Buy Credit Card-- Best Buy is no different than a "debt collector" except that they're collecting their own debt and so Congress said they wouldn't be governed by the FDCPA. Some day that might change, but for now, that's the rules.

It doesn't mean that creditors have free reign to terrorize you; there are other laws that may apply, including state law, but it does mean that you can't sue a creditor under the FDCPA...

... unless that creditor has become a debt collector. Aha! Those sneaky lawyers have found a way to stretch the law a little and let you sue people who maybe weren't intended to be sued.

Or maybe they were intended to be sued.

Creditors can become "debt collectors" in a couple of ways. For today, Day 14 of 30 Days of Debt Collection, let's look at one obvious way that Congress already thought of. (See? You thought Congress couldn't do anything, but back in the day, Congress got some real work done.)

Congress has defined some terms under the FDCPA, including "debt collector" and "creditor," and it said a "creditor" is

any person who offers or extends credit creating a debt or to whom a debt is owed, but such term does not include any person to the extent that he receives an assignment or transfer of a debt in default solely for the purpose of facilitating collection of such debt for another.
The important part of that is this: does not include any person to the extent that he receives an assignment or transfer of a debt in default...

What Congress did there is create an exception to the definition of "creditor." A "creditor" is not someone who gets a debt transferred to him or her after the debt is in default.

That's a pretty big loophole, because "debt buying" is a pretty big business, and a lot of debt gets sold at one time or another. If that debt is in default when it's sold (or assigned or transferred) then the new person is a debt collector.

Which means if I did stop paying my Best Buy card, and it got sold to ABC Credit Card Companies, they're a debt collector, right then and there.

Tomorrow, I'll look at another way creditors become debt collectors. Then we'll look at debt collectors who aren't! I know you'll be waiting anxiously.