40 States would like for the government to concentrate on Debt Relief Companies

The attorneys general from Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Guam, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia and Wyoming have all asked the Federal Trade Commission to boost the control of companies that have been offering debt aid to persons and families in the United States.

One of the things that the FTC is currently considering imposing on the debt respite agencies is to incorporate them in the Telemarketing Sales Rule.

One wrong step from the Credit Solutions of America business led to the actions being filed. The business has been incorrectly claiming that it was able to reduce credit card debt by 50%. This annoyed Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan enough to sue the company and its CEO. In the proceedings, Madigan states that Credit Solutions of America never go through with their end of the bargain and never truly negotiate with the creditors of their clients even though the clients stop paying their creditors directly and are truly making payments to Credit Solutions of America. Not surprisingly, because the creditors arent getting their money, they are suing the buyer to get their money; and winning.

Madigan has also said that her office has received over 12,000 complaints concerning this subject.

Some of the rules that the FTC is considering imposing on the debt relief companies incorporate:

- Prohibiting the agencies from charging the user anything until services have been performed. This would also require more disclosure to consumers; counting how long it will take to clear up the debts and the amount it will cost.

- Prohibiting the business from being able to misrepresent things such as surcharges, accomplishment rates, and any other information that alludes to the impact of the debt relief services on the consumers credit report and credit history.

Some debt relief businesses actually do what they say they are going to do, but other companies like this one listed in the court case above are awful and need to be regulated. The companies that do what they state they do shouldnt have an issue with the new set of laws that are imposed on them. For the reason that the companies before now follow the rules, any new rules will just mean that its leveling the playing field for the excellent companies.
v

Article Source: http://casinoarticles.us

Concerned in learning more about debt relief companies then consider stopping by Lucrative Investing.

Please Rate this Article

5 out of 54 out of 53 out of 52 out of 51 out of 5 

Not yet Rated