Midland Credit Management [MCM] review: Scam! Watch out! 9

These (people) have been bugging me for years and won't give up. I did answer the phone once and almost agreed to pay where the A/H said I didn't sound like I really ment to pay. I couldn't believe it but soon told him to K/M/A and hung up. I put my phone on the answer machine and turned off the ringer. Only use cell anyway. :-) Don't pay they con't afford to pay a lawyer anyway--just threats...just wish there was a way to get their phone #...one that wouldn't go to an answer machine.

They've been calling my phone # for my father, who is NOT registered on my phone. Plus my father has alzheimer's and the supervisor I talked to didn't even know what that was. Of course he wouldn't disclose any information to me, and when I told him my aunt who has legal guardianship tried calling them and of course she couldn't get a hold of anyone, he didn't know what to say. Plus I mentioned if they really needed to take legal action they would have by now, they've been calling for the last 6 months.
So have nothing good to say about them. They don't help @ all.

Yes, those Son of a Guns have been telling me the same thing. I pay $50 a month then they sent me a letter telling me when it would be due. I didn't agree to a specific date and agreed to pay whenever I could, but did acknowledge the debt. I missed 1 payment and they begun harrassing me via cell phone. Some kind of way, the ### got my work # and called me. I cursed them out and stated to never call me at work and they did anyway. Then they have the audacity to call you back to back. Today they called @8:20am, hung up and called at 8:23am and off an on all day long up until 7pm. This is unacceptable and unbelievable. They attempt to leave a message knowing they got your voicemail and say, "Hello, hello." They are some dumb ### people!

Midland FTC Roundtable Comments - The following is a direct quote from materials submitted to the FTC in 2009

"Statute of Limitations
A statute of limitations, which provides a deadline for the commencement of litigation, is defined is various ways across many states, with distinctions based on the nature of a contract, availability of supporting documentation, location of activity, and other factors that are reviewed and applied by courts at different jurisdictional levels. Our company uses litigation as only one of several methods to collect debts and, for those accounts that are past the statute of limitations, we do collect on such accounts through methods such as telephone calls and letters because there is no prohibition on such actions. We do not, however, knowingly pursue litigation against those consumers whose statute has expired. As you know, the FTC issued a Consumer Alert in October 2004 that specifically concluded that collection of debt for which a statute of limitations has run is not deceptive, misleading, or prohibited by law. With only a few exceptions, the expiration of the statute of limitations does not extinguish the debt or our right to continue collections, and we do collect such debts in the same general course of business that we collect all other debts.

Through court decisions, the statute of limitations for credit card accounts has been reduced in several states, and a number of state legislatures have also proposed a reduction in the time period for litigation. It is our view that shorter statutes will not have the intended effect and will lead to a significant increase in the number of lawsuits filed. Companies will be compelled to file lawsuits earlier in the collection process to protect their interests, and will no longer have the time and flexibility to work with consumers having financial difficulties. While shorter statutes may initially appear to be favorable for consumers, the result will likely not be beneficial to them because agencies will no longer be able to wait for individuals to financially recover. Additionally, the litigation costs and court activity will only add to the burden faced by such consumers.

Finally, consumers are currently provided with detailed information about their debt and numerous notices regarding their rights, and it is our view that informing consumers about the legal status of their account is problematic. Consumers receive a validation letter each time that an account is transferred to a new servicer, and consumers have also already likely received many letters and notices from the original creditor and prior owners and servicers, so we believe that sufficient disclosures have been made to consumers and that requiring an additional notice will result in legal questions and other issues that collection agencies should not be required to address. Letters to consumers should be concise, informative and provide details regarding the subject account and payment options, but should not be complicated with legal advice related to the statute of limitations, tax consequences, or other similar issues, which will complicate letters and make them less effective and more difficult for consumers to read and understand."

I have a blocking app on my phone so I can block unfamiliar phone numbers and, since these yahoos never leave a voicemail, I add whatever number they call from to my list. I’m not going to call them because they don’t have the simple courtesy to leave a message of any kind telling me why they are calling. If they were legit, they would leave some kind of message.

Well, they called AGAIN today. I called back on the number they called me from and the person that answered with the name Rachel, but yet it was a man’s voice! What the heck? Very strange. It’s funny that every time they call it’s from a different number each time and they never leave a voicemail.

They call from 4-6 different numbers.

They call at 8am and 8pm.

They are nothing but a scam company with 0 reason to be calling me.

I have no loans, no credit cards. Nothing to owe a penny on.

They wont leave a voicemail and when I do answer they dont say anything and just hang up.

So sick of these clowns.