National Corrective Group, Inc. (NCG) is now the name of the company operating the ACCS "district attorney bad check restitution program" collection business. ACCS contracts with local prosecuting attorneys’ offices to operate Bad Check Restitution Programs in 140 counties throughout the nation.
Mike Ramos signed a contract with on October 8, 2004, despite a complaint that stated (Case No. 01-21151 PVT) the district attorneys signing contracts with ACCS "failed to provide check writers an opportunity to be heard regarding the imposition of any fine, fee or charge regarding a dishonored check, by having ACCS demand and collect unlawful check fees and by delegating to ACCS, a private collection agency with a financial stake in the outcome, the unreviewable authority to determine whether there is probable cause to believe a crime has been committed" Original Complaint at p. 14, lines 16-21 and the added problem of "ACCS's employees [ ] impersonating California County District Attorneys"--Original Complaint at p. 14, lines 14-15.
Public Citizen [www.citizen.org/litigation/forms/cases/] who is serving as co-counsel in a California-wide class action (which includes San Bernardino County) states at their web site that the current case challenges arrangements made between local prosecutors to in effect "rent" their name and authority to private debt collectors, who use false threats of prosecution to coerce people who have written bad checks to pay various fees. The fees are then split between the debt collectors and the prosecutors.
Once ACCS obtains a contract, contends Public Citizen, it (ACCS) advertises to merchants and other debt collectors for unpaid checks. When the checks are referred to ACCS, it then sends collection letters to the check writers that warn that they have been accused of a crime, and that to avoid prosecution, they have “the option” to enroll in an expensive mandatory “misdemeanor diversion program,” pay the check and pay additional fees assessed by ACCS.
In a class action lawsuits filed in California [Elena Del Campo v. ACCS, Civ. No. 01-21151 JW (Northern District of California-San Jose)], consumers are challenging ACCS’s collection practices. The plaintiffs in these lawsuits claim that the letters are deceptive and misleading for many reasons including:
-
The letters do not disclose that they are sent by a private company, rather than the prosecuting attorney’s office.
-
ACCS in almost all cases has received the dishonored check directly from a merchant, or another collection agency. In most cases, the merchant or collection agency has referred the check to ACCS for collection, and has not accused the check writer of a crime. In most cases a district attorney has not reviewed the case, or even seen the check.
-
In most states the check writer has not committed a crime unless the check writer intended to write a bad check. (The details of what constitutes a bad check crime vary from state to state).
-
Most or all of the fees that ACCS charges have no legal basis.
-
ACCS fails to provide the consumer warnings on the letters that the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act requires.
-
ACCS threatens check writers with prosecution when it does not have the intent or capability of prosecuting a check writer. Also when ACCS sends its letters to individual check writers, it has no idea whether a prosecutor will decide to prosecute any individual check writer. After ACCS exhausts its collection efforts, it may send the check to the local prosecutor, who will then review the check and any evidence to decide whether to take any action
THE QUESTIONS WE ALL SHOULD HAVE FOR MIKE RAMOS (aside from potentially creating liability for the County for a violation of thousands of people's civil rights) is (1) Why didn't Ramos investigate the alleged abuses in OUR county by ACCS which were alleged in a US District court action in 2001, three years BEFORE Ramos signed the contract? (2) Why is it that someone OUTSIDE the DA's office is investigating operations in our County that appear to be illegal--AGAIN??
No comments:
Post a Comment