REFORMING AN INDUSTRY

After 10/27/10, virtually all of the companies offering to settle debt for a fee, will have to charge those fees based on a contingency. In other words, you pay for the service contingent upon who you hire, having successfully negotiated a reduced pay off amount with your creditors that you then accept and fund. Makes a ton of sense right? Yes indeed!

People will, however, still need to approach the idea of hiring someone to settle debts with caution.

Where We Were

Debt negotiation companies have, for the most part, been able to charge upfront fees. Often, the fees have been spread out over 6 to 18 months or more. This practice has long been recognized by some of us in the industry as one of the leading causes for consumers to “fail and bail” from their settlement program.

• The reason for the fail; money that could have been aggressively saved up to fund the earliest settlement offer went to the service providers fees instead.
• The reason for the bail; creditors and their assignees continue down a relatively predictable path to collect on unpaid accounts which can eventually lead to filing a court action to force you to pay.

Being sued does not necessarily mean the death of your debt settlement plan, but you need resources to address the lawsuit before it becomes a judgment. Without the money needed to address the issue, it will often mean the end of the road. Having paid upfront fees to a company who put their profit ahead of your success means you have limited, or no, resources to maneuver through the different stages of collection.

Where We Are

You may have, or currently do, recognize a debt settlement plan to be a realistic approach for you to avoid bankruptcy. Having enrolled (or thinking of enrolling) in a plan with a company whose fees were/are/still paid prior to successful negotiations is equivalent to gambling. You bet you can get through the settlements before getting sued. The company you hired bets they can get you to pay them all their fees before you bail.

Many companies who sell or perform debt settlement today will find that, without the ability to charge the high upfront fees, they will not be able to keep the marketing machine going. They will leave the industry. In their wake, we will hear from many more consumers who were sold the hope of avoiding bankruptcy by sales people whose only motivation was to meet a quota, keep their telemarketing chair and get paid. For more than a year, the media and internet has been ablaze with stories of people being taken in by the promises of many players in the debt relief industry. They are a statistic of the “fail and bail”. The statistics will get worse as several companies close their doors and leave their customers in a lurch, having paid in advance for a service that now will not be completed. At least, not by the people who were already paid for it.

Where We’re Headed

Do I sound a bit jaded? That’s because I am. So much so, that I can see where we are potentially headed in this industry.

Beginning in September, I think we will start to see some similarities with new and existing companies offering debt settlement  based on the now required (in most cases) contingency fee structure. Two of the similarities will be:

1. The new sales approach; “You need to come up with money as quick as possible to settle with your creditors”. – This is a good thing! It has been missing from the message of the majority of people selling debt settlement for a decade.
2. Many of the companies offering success fee debt settlement will charge between 25%-30% of savings where possible (some states have limits or caps on fees –Illinois is capped at 15%). – This is a bad thing!

When comparing 50% of your account balance as an average settlement, 30% of savings is roughly the same as charging the 15% of debt enrolled that has been the average in the industry to date. Fees could actually be higher than before with debts settled early in the program and for less than 50%.

We will still see high “fail and bail” statistics because companies will settle a debt and collect their contingency fee first, before moving onto the next settlement. There really is no problem with that per say. They did a job and should get paid for it. It is the correct model to have. Always has been. The problem is if the fee is too high, it still takes just as long to settle the debts as it did prior to the FTC banning upfront fees for a settlement service.

Where We End Up

I estimate it will take a year for the industry to settle in to the new business and operational realities created by the new FTC rules. Some companies are going to try to adapt, only to quickly find it no longer worth their while. Some will find that they should have been doing business this way all along, and will thrive. The amount of companies around a year from now will be far fewer than we have today. Within 12 to 18 months, the industry will have completed the all too necessary cleansing of those who came to it in order to make a quick buck.

BOTTOM LINE:

If you are a suitable candidate for debt settlement, which is someone who otherwise would have to file bankruptcy, look for companies with the lowest contingency fees. Even better, look for a company that: Offers low fees and other flexibilities that will lead to your success!

I have continuously written articles and spoken out in interviews about the practice of “selling” debt settlement. Selling someone into debt settlement is the number one reason the industry has been tarred and feathered in the media. The over hyped selling by profiteers and sales groups has resulted in enforcement actions by many states, and new FTC rules, in order to curb abuse.

DEBT SETTLEMENT SHOULD NOT BE SOLD!

Steve Rhode, on his blog, getoutofdebt.org, regularly covers the debt relief industry and its foul ups, bleeps and plunderers. He has recently covered several lawsuits filed by employees against the firms they sell/sold debt settlement for. The lawsuits allege failure to pay wages related to work performed. Steve has posted about lawsuits against: Lloyd Ward and Associates, ABC Debt Relief, The Debt Answer, Debt RX USA, Silverleaf Debt Solutions, CreditAnswers, and Credit Solutions of America. Key assertions in these lawsuits provide a clear view into the sales culture at some of these companies. I will focus on Steve’s post about the employee suit against Credit Solutions. Credit Solutions are also the target of multiple state legal actions.

From Steve’s post where he excerpts from the court record (my comments are in bold):

For at least three years prior to filing of this complaint and continuing (hereinafter “Liability Period”), CSA had a policy and practice of not correctly compensating its debt consultants for work performed for the benefit of CSA over and above forty (40) hours per week, to wit: virtually all debt consultants received a $2,000 forgivable draw their first 90 days of employment and a non forgivable draw of $2,000 per month thereafter. Debt consultants qualified debtors for debt settlement plans of Defendant by verifying the debtor possessed at least $10,000 in debt. Next debt consultants analyzed each creditor comprising the $10,000 is owed at least $600 and there are contracts in place between the creditor and CSA. The debt consultant sets up a CSA account for each creditor. Lastly, the debt consultant verified the debtor’s bank accounts and assisted the debtor in picking a payment plan. Once a plan was chosen the debt consultant, using CSA guidelines, would set up a monthly draft on the debtor’s bank account whereby CSA would obtain its fee and moneys to satisfy the debtor’s creditors. Eighty-five percent (85%) of CSA’s fee is collected from debtors’ accounts within the first 90 days. Debt consultants received a fee from the first monthly draft which was a percentage determined on the total volume of draft’s occurring monthly attributable to that debt consultant.

Here we learn that “debt consultants” are what I would more correctly define as sales people. The way this alleged fact is laid out would actually describe more of an order taker. What do they actually do by way of a consultation? It appears they just hit the immediate qualifiers, and then help you pick a payment option that will work for you. There is an obvious motivation for “picking” a payment that you will agree to. That is how they get paid! They have to do it though (more on this below).

Debt consultants were required to work a minimum of 12 hours per day, but were expected to work as many hours as necessary to reach assigned sales goals. Debt consultants regularly worked 14-16 hours a day and CSA provided debt consultants a room to nap and sleep when necessary to reach company goals.

Imagine the pressure to hit sales goals. In the current job market, these sales people HAD to perform to keep the job. They HAD to hit sales goals even if it meant sleeping at HQ to do it! No pressure, right?

Debt consultants were not provided a rest or lunch break, but instead, CSA served debt consultants “cup of noodles” for lunch so they would not have to leave their desk and could continuing selling the debt settlement services.

This allegation is one of the most descriptive of the debt settlement sales culture I have ever seen. Why not just put a shackle from the desk to the ankle of the sales person? Were there bed pans nearby?

Debt consultants worked six (6) days a week.

Ever see Ben Affleck in the movie “Boiler Room”? “ALWAYS BE CLOSING” – The sale that is.

As stated above, debt consultants do not receive overtime for hours worked over 40 in any week.

And why should they? You think cups of noodles are free?

CSA’s revised compensation/bonus plan containing an overtime component does not correctly calculate debt consultants’ regular rate of pay for purposes of calculating overtime; i.e. commissions paid on top of consultants’ hourly rate are not included in their regular rate of pay. – Source

Other than the outright lies that are told, there is no single more frustrating fact about the selling of a debt settlement service than the pick a payment plan approach. It is sold that way because it has to be. A consumer who is struggling to pay their creditors the required monthly minimum is focused on the dollar amount they cannot come up with. When a debt settlement sales person suggests all you need is to establish a monthly dollar figure that you can do, the hook is set!

Imagine if the sales people at Credit Solutions actually shared the TRUTH of the matter with you. If they told you that in order to be successful with settling your delinquent accounts, you are in a race. You have to come up with the money to fund offers as fast as possible. You would not feel the sigh of relief that is purposefully designed into the sales approach by the majority of people selling debt settlement.  Instead, your heart would palpitate. You would know that debt settlement is a tough choice, not an easy one. You would have a much clearer idea if debt settlement is even right for you. The sales person for CSA would not close as many sales. Do you think they would ever get to go home?

Don’t consult with a sales person offering debt relief!

If you are asked what you can come up with each month to put toward settlement, or someone “helps” you come up with a figure they are confident you will bite on, you are talking to someone offering “pick-a-pay”. Pick-a-Pay is a suitability test that everyone will pass. Using this approach means virtually any one breathing will qualify for debt settlement. That is, and has been, absurd (absurdly profitable that is).

Look to speak with someone who actually works with consumers and their creditors/collectors on a daily basis. If they have any experience and are what I would consider a responsible service provider, they will TELL you the amount of money you will need to come up with, and how quickly, in order to SUCCEED with settlement in your particular situation. Armed with this knowledge, you will then be able to evaluate whether or not filing bankruptcy would be the better choice.

You can speak with just such an expert by scheduling a consultation with a CRN negotiator. All CRN consults are conducted by people who, every day, actually settle debt or provide detailed information to CRN members on how to settle their own. There is no one more prepared to provide you the necessary details about how this approach will apply to your unique set of circumstances.

For more on how debt settlement is inappropriately SOLD, read:

• Dude Meets Debt Wall
• Shocking Eye Witness Debt Settlement Report
• Debt Settlement Marketing: The Gist, The Juice, and the Lies

The Debt Relief Industry will be forever changed by the announcement and publishing of new rules from the FTC today. The rules are designed to protect consumers from those marketing and providing debt settlement services.

The most contested  measure anticipated in the new rules is a ban on companies charging upfront fees. Upfront fees have been held up as necessary by the majority of debt settlement companies who have lobbied heavily to maintain the status quo. Consumer advocates and regulators have argued that upfront fees are the equivalent of an abusive business practice. We, at CRN and Debt Bytes, agree! Which is why CRN fees for full service debt settlement have always been based on SUCCESS, after the creditor is paid.

Stay tuned to Debt Bytes, as we will be covering the impacts of these changes in the coming weeks.

For Immediate Release

July 28, 2010
**MEDIA ADVISORY FOR TOMORROW**

FTC Chairman to Announce a New Debt Relief Rule to Protect Financially Distressed Consumers at Middle Class Task Force Event

WASHINGTON – Tomorrow, Thursday, July 29^th, at 1:30 PM ET, Federal Trade Commission Chairman Jon Leibowitz will announce a new rule to protect consumers of debt relief services at a Middle Class Task Force event at the White House. Following the Chairman’s announcement, Vice President Biden will discuss the administration’s consumer protection agenda and the importance of consumer protection to middle-class families.

This event will be POOLED for TV cameras, and OPEN to print, online, radio and still photographers. An RSVP is required to participate.

WHAT: FTC Chairman to Announce a New Debt Relief Rule to Protect Financially Distressed Consumers at Middle Class Task Force Event

WHO: Vice President Joe Biden, Federal Trade Commission Chairman Jon Leibowitz

WHEN: Thursday, July 29, 2010, 1:30 PM ET

• Gather time: 1:00 PM ET at the White House stakeout location
• Camera pre-set: 12:30 PM ET

WHERE: Eisenhower Executive Office Building, Room 430

RSVP: Press who wish to cover this event should RSVP to press@ovp.eop.gov by tomorrow, Thursday, July 29, 2010 at 8:00 AM ET. **Press who DO NOT have a White House hard pass should include their Date of Birth and Social Security Number. All press must enter the White House at the Northwest Gate.**

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?

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