CRN Supports Changes to the Telemarketing Rule Just Announced by the FTC

Yesterday, the FTC announced important changes to the Telemarketing Sales Rule, http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2010/07/tsr.shtm. The changes are intended to protect consumers with too much credit card debt from abusive debt settlement practices. One of the most important changes is that settlement firms will no longer be able to charge consumers up-front fees to settle their debts as of 10/27/10.

Overall, I am thrilled that the FTC is reigning in abusive debt settlement firms. For too long, these firms have been allowed to prey on consumers with too much credit card debt. Sadly, in far too many instances, consumers who worked with such firms saw their financial situations grow worse, not better, because of the large up-front fees they had to pay, and many of those consumers eventually ended up in bankruptcy.

The rules will shape the industry and promote the best practices moving forward.

I am concerned that some settlement firms may charge a large fee at the back end of their work for consumers. I have always contended that the fee amount charged by a debt settlement service provider directly correlates to how long it will take an individual to be successful in settling all of their debts. Program duration is directly attributable to increased risk of aggressive collection efforts such as filing lawsuits against a consumer in order to collect.

When consumers are looking into debt settlement as one of the few legitimate options available to deal with crushing debt, it is IMPERATIVE that they still weigh the COST for the service.

I will be posting more detailed comments about the amendments soon. Stay tuned!

Well… maybe shocking to some.

I do not often post on consults I do. This one from about six weeks ago provides both warning and sound advice.

A gentleman in Indiana called in to the toll free line here at Consumer Recovery Network after hitting our website while researching debt settlement. I answered the call and proceeded down a list of general things I ask during a typical debt consultation.

He had already spoken to a representative of a NY law firm after hearing a radio commercial advertising services to reduce debt. He felt he had a pretty good foundation of what settlement was. As I started to lay out some facts about debt settlement, he started to lay out a little confusion. His confusion is a direct result of things that were not covered in his consult with the representative of the law firm.

The end result of the consult I did was that he now knew about the knock on effects of settlement and that it should only be considered as an alternative to bankruptcy. He recognized he was not close to bankruptcy, but did have a need to get out of debt. During the consult he recognized he could quickly sell 2 cars he was not using for under blue book and pay off his credit cards.

I heard from him the next day.

Being the considerate type, he had called the law firm rep after speaking with me, to inform him he would not need to enroll in his program. The rep (obviously the consummate closer) tried to overcome his objections and continue to sell him on settlement.

He told the rep that he did not want late payments reported on his credit report for the next 7 years. The rep told him “Oh, that’s only for corporations”!

He told the rep that he was not willing to risk being sued. The reps response was “Well… I suppose it could happen, but you would be the first”!

First what? First person the rep lied to that day? This guy exemplifies what is wrong in the industry! He should be answering his telephone with “Thank you for calling the Bib-N-Fib. Can I take your order?”

I could tell my car selling buddy thought I would be shocked to hear that someone was so willing to deceive in order to make a buck. Instead, I shocked him when I informed him it came as no surprise at all. I did tell him that I was highly skeptical that the representative that he was speaking with was an actual employee of the law firm. The rep was likely just a sales guy at a call center where callers from radio and TV ads are funneled, and whose only purpose is to sell callers on settlement so they can get paid a commission. Even if they have to lie, omit or deceive to do it!

I don’t think car guy would have gotten the same nonsense if he called the law firm directly.

The point of this article:

Consumers should only speak to the actual service provider they would work with. Any middle man has one motivation and that is the commission. Some are far more artful in their selling techniques than who car guy talked to (let’s hope most), but why would you need to speak with anyone other than who you are going to work with? You wouldn’t.

If you are looking into bankruptcy and have a consultation (do more than 1), you are speaking to the attorney or an employee of the firm on their direct telephone line or standing in the office.

If you are looking into a debt management plan offered through consumer credit counseling, you are speaking to the counselor or an employee of the agency on their direct telephone line or standing in the office.

Why in the world should you look into a settlement company any other way? You shouldn’t.

There are thousands of places on the internet offering a consultation to see how they can help you get out of debt. There is a daily bombarding of radio and television commercials offering debt help. The vast majority have no direct connection to the company that will actually be providing you a product or service.

If you hear from whom ever you are speaking to that they are going to “refer” you to the best, most reputable this that or the other thing, your talking to a sales guy. He or she gets paid by selling to you and will not be working with you after you start. They often have no accountability to the actual service provider.

ALWAYS start at the source!

I cannot identify one exception to this. Can you?

FICO Data Reveals That Settling Your Debts Damages

Your Credit Scores Less Than Filing for Bankruptcy

FICO, the company that calculates consumers’ FICO scores — the scores that are the most widely used by American creditors to determine whether or not they will extend credit to a particular consumer and the terms of that credit — recently released data showing how different negative actions consumers might take in regard to their credit will affect their scores. Among other things, the data shows that settling your debts is far less damaging to your FICO scores than filing for bankruptcy. In other words, the data helps make the case for why settlement rather than bankruptcy is an excellent alternative for many cash-strapped consumers, assuming that they either settle their own debts or work with a reputable settlement firm that charges fairly for its services.

The data released by FICO and available on its web site at: http://www.myfico.com/crediteducation/questions/Credit_Problem_Comparison.aspx, shows that as a consequence of filing for bankruptcy, consumers may see as much as a 240 point drop in their FICO scores. In contrast, if they settle their debts, their FICO scores may drop by 125 points at most. Interestingly because of the way that FICO scores are calculated, when consumers have higher scores prior to either filing for bankruptcy or settling their debts, their credit scores are harmed more by settlement or bankruptcy than are the scores of consumers who had lower FICO scores to begin with. According to FICO, the reason for this difference is that the scores of lower scoring consumers already reflect their credit missteps.

Despite the FICO data, I must caution you not to base your decision about which debt relief option to pursue based on that information. All debt relief options — credit counseling, settlement and bankruptcy — will have a negative effect on your credit histories and/or FICO scores for some time. (See my recent blog, Debt Relief Options vs. Your Credit Score).

When you are deciding how to deal with your debt, your primary concerns should be gaining a clear understanding of how each option works and its pros and cons, and determining whether the numbers associated with a particular option make sense for you. For example, your first test if you are considering settlement should be whether or not you can accumulate the money you need to fund your creditors’ settlement offers before your risk of being sued by them for what you owe begins to escalate. If you cannot come up with the money you need to settle your debts relatively quickly, then bankruptcy is probably your better option.

For free help determining which debt relief option would work best for you, fill out CRN’s consultation request form.

The gist:

Here is the link of a company that solicited Consumer Recovery Network to buy live transfer leads from them last month (These come in virtually every day):

ineedyourleads.com

Commercials like this are aired on television; the consumer calls the number and is asked perhaps 3-4 qualifying questions and re-routed to a call center or settlement firm with their own internal sales floor. Perhaps the number provided will go direct to a sales floor without a pit stop for a 4 question qualifier.

This type of advertising, at its peak last year (perhaps some will pay this even today) ran anywhere from $75.00 to over $100.00 per live transfer. A good (meaning productive–not necessarily ethical) call center in this industry, paying for, and working these leads, has a cost per acquisition (CPA) of anywhere between $600.00 to $1200.00. They have to run a 20% close ratio or higher, in most cases, to hit their numbers. That means they have to approach what they do as a sales process rather than a consultation process.

The majority of people sold into settlement, in my opinion, don’t belong in it. Either the process was sold as butterflies and rainbows, or the plan, due to high upfront fees, which are often successfully disguised to the average consumer stressed to the gills and looking for relief, provides for high incompletion and program drop rates. The higher the fee, no matter how it is calculated or paid, is one of the bigger stumbling blocks to being successful in working with a settlement company. The fee itself can prevent the consumer’s success. Fees average 15% of the total debt that is submitted for settlement. Why so high? Often enough, the fee amount is related to the juice, but I am getting ahead of myself.

The only ethical way to promote settlement as an option is from a consultation/informative perspective where there is no pressure to hit a quota due to high CPA. If a company does any national advertising or purchases live transfers from a national advertiser whether radio or television, it is nearly 100% assured that they are using a sales approach. They must closely monitor closing ratios of the phone staff, and cut anyone occupying a chair who doesn’t hit the numbers. I have visited a few call centers. The majority of men and women in these call center atmospheres are best defined as telemarketers. There are, I am sure, exceptions. In fact, I have met some. That is not the norm though. These are the same people who will be just as effective at telemarketing residential home siding, as settlement services.

The juice:

Your future… sold to the highest paying servicer! On first contact, if you are not talking to the company that is actually going to handle your file, you are talking to a sales guy. His motivation is selling you into settlement, whether or not it’s a good fit for your situation, in order to get a commission. The criteria for where the sales guy will refer you, in my opinion and industry experience, will not be based on who does the best work, who has the most success with consumers, who will best serve your actual needs for getting out of debt with a settlement process, or who is going to charge the least so that your money actually goes to your creditors. It is absolutely (and unfortunately) predictable that the vast majority of those selling settlement, will gravitate to referring you to where they will get paid the most. You will seldom be referred to a servicer whose fees do not maximize the commission sought by the sales person or the company they work for.

The investment required to run one of these centers requires their owners to search out the companies that pay the highest commission for the referral. I have both seen and heard reference to as much as 70% – 80%, payouts of client fees for referrals. Ridiculous? Absolutely! This model is unsustainable for any long period of time. The marketing firm will just move onto the next back end servicer who provides the highest commission. I have witnessed it. Hess Kennedy gets shut down, the sales center then refers to Allegro. Allegro is now shut down, so they will move onto the next. If you’re reading this and are wondering if you are a victim of the “gist & the juice”, the fact that you’re wondering means you probably are.

The price for all of this is passed onto the consumer. They are the ones paying for it through their wallet/purse, and also in the form of lost time and opportunity for the fact that settlement was never the right option for many of them in the first place. They were sold into it.

The lies:

One of several fabrications, or shall I say “massaged facts” used by the settlement sales person is a manageable monthly payment into your settlement fund, thereby extending program length. This is huge, and is used repeatedly because of its success. For example: You have $30,000 in unsecured credit card debt and are paying interest rates somewhere in the 20% range. Your struggling to meet minimums and are looking for options and respond to an ad to “settle for pennies on dollar” or “Get your piece of the bailout and settle with your creditors”. The sales pitch is to put you into a settlement program where you will not be paying your creditors and saving $416.00 dollars a month for 36 months. This is half your current debt. Well Shazaam! That sounds like the kind of relief you are looking for! Your monthly minimum payments, at the high interest you are stuck at, equaled a thousand plus, and this nice man or woman is saying you can be out of debt for the low-low price of $416.00 a month. This is e-a-s-y to sell. This type of relief being offered is what many of us would focus on, no matter how much more there is to the pitch. It’s human nature. It’s the relief we need, and we found it. Some will outline a 42 month plan, or even longer. E-A-S-Y.

Here is the problem. The longer it takes to settle with your creditors, the higher the risk one or more of your creditors will sue you in court in order to collect the debt. Where is your sales guy when this happens? Did he mention you could be sued? Maybe in passing, and if so, he probably said it is very rare to have that happen. What you were not told is that the longer your program lasts the more risk you face of being sued. That would take away all of the relief you felt from having been paying over $1000 a month, to now saving less than half of that a month for settlement. That little massaging of facts goes a long way for the sales close ratio.

The truth about settlement is; you have to be aggressive. You have to put every available penny aside to settle the debt as fast as possible in order to avoid something as adverse as a lawsuit. The relief you will find by using a settlement approach is not going to come until the debt is gone. Settlement is the “rip the band aid off” approach, rather than picking at the corners.

How big is your risk of being sued along the way? It will be different for everyone. It can depend on how fast you can settle, who your creditors are, who they may assign the debt to, who a creditor sells your debt to, what your credit report looks like, the state you live in, transaction history on the account leading up to default. Is a debt settlement sales person going to go over all of that with you?

Lawsuits filed, in order to collect on unsecured credit card accounts, are generally a pretty low percentage compared to how many accounts default each year. I believe those numbers will start to increase in what’s left of 2009 and into 2010. The two largest card issuers in the U.S. have been huge participants in submitting defaulted accounts for arbitration, an alternative dispute resolution done outside of the courts. The National Arbitration Forum (NAF) and the American Arbitration Association (AAA) have ceased all arbitration activity relating to consumer credit cards this summer. Card issuers will likely increase the accounts they place with collection law firms as a result.

At Consumer Recovery Network, we do NO paid advertising. We do not have sales people. When you consult with CRN, you are talking to a specialist on first contact, someone who works with our members and their creditors every day.

If you have hit the debt wall and want to learn about all of your debt management options, including debt settlement, visit Consumer Recovery Network. While you’re there, learn about becoming a member of Consumer Recovery Network, with no risk to you, and schedule a consult to find out if you should pursue debt negotiation.

By: Michael Bovee
CRN President