Sign in

David B. Schumacher PC

Sharing is caring! Have something to share about David B. Schumacher PC? Use RevDex to write a review
Reviews David B. Schumacher PC

David B. Schumacher PC Reviews (4)

Oct 22, 2019

I am an attorney representing [redacted] in this matter I have reviewed this matter and believe that the communications and notifications were appropriately taken by my officeThe complainant is not the primary account holder, but my office was given permission to speak with her about this matter by the primary account holder On October 24, 2017, the complainant spoke with three different representatives in my office, all of which attempted to respond to her inquires It was ultimately determined that the best course of action would be to have all future communication done in writing The complainant requested documentation to verify and support the actions taken by my office in the underlying court case The requested documentation was mailed to the primary account holder at the current address provided by complainant on that same day We requested that complainant provide any pertinent information to my office in writing, so that we could review it with my client My office has attempted to resolve this matter within the parameters outlined by my client I am a debt collector for [redacted] *** This communication is an attempt to collect a debt and any information that you provide will be used to collect the debt

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me

I am an attorney representing [redacted] in this matter.  I have reviewed this matter and believe that the communications and notifications were appropriately taken by my office. The complainant is not the primary account holder, but my office was given permission to speak...

with her about this matter by the primary account holder.  On October 24, 2017, the complainant spoke with three different representatives in my office, all of which attempted to respond to her inquires.  It was ultimately determined that the best course of action would be to have all future communication done in writing.  The complainant requested documentation to verify and support the actions taken by my office in the underlying court case.  The requested documentation was mailed to the primary account holder at the current address provided by complainant on that same day.  We requested that complainant provide any pertinent information to my office in writing, so that we could review it with my client.  My office has attempted to resolve this matter within the parameters outlined by my client.    I am a debt collector for [redacted]  This communication is an attempt to collect a debt and any information that you provide will be used to collect the debt.

Review: I HAVE TWO ACCOUNTS WITH [redacted] THERE OUTSIDE STATUE LIMITATION SHOULD BE CLOSED ACCOUNTS. HOW EVER [redacted] HAS INVESTIGATED THE ACCOUNTS AS BEING CHARGED OFF. [redacted] NO LONGER OWNS THE ACCOUNTS SO [redacted] WILL HAVE TO BE RESPONSIBLE TO CLOSE THE ACCOUNTS. [redacted] WILL NOT EXCEPT THE LETTER FROM [redacted] THAT STATES ACCOUNTS ARE RESOLVED UNLESS LETTER STATES CLOSED AND HAS BEEN RESOLVED. [redacted] REFUSES TO CLOSE THE ACCOUNTS OR SETTLE ON THE OFFER OF 11,344 THAT WAS OFFERED FROM [redacted] THE PRINCIPAL ON THE ACCOUNTS ARE 3,854.08 AND 4,076.26 EQUALS TO 7,930.34 [redacted] WANTS TO COLLECT 24,080.30 ALMOST TRIPLE THE PRINCIPAL. I SPOKE TO [redacted] ORIGINALLY WHO ACCIDENTLY OFFERED BOTH ACCOUNTS @ 11,344 WHEN I CALLED TO AGRRE ON THE OFFER THEY SAID WAS A MISTAKE ON [redacted] BEHALF TOOK OFFER OFF THE TABLE SAYING I QUOTE "CLIENT KNOWS WHAT KIND OF CAR YOU DRIVE WE WILL NEVER SETTLED FOR LOWER THEN 11,344" AFTER FUTHER INVESTIGATION I LEARNED BOTTOM LINE THE ACCOUNTS ARE OUTSIDE STATUE LIMITATION THERE'S ONLY ONE JUDGEMENT NOT TWO,THE COLLECTION AGENCY IF WILLING CAN CLOSE THE ACCOUNTS,CHARGE HALF OF THE PRINCIPLE,LIFT THE JUDGEMNET OR ONLY COLLECT THE PRINCIPLE AND PRACTICE THE FDCPA FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PRACTICES ACT WHICH THEY ARE NOT. I'VE BEEN YELLED AT LIED TO FROM [redacted] HUNG THE PHONE UP ON ME AND [redacted] ANSWERED THE PHONE AGGRESIVE TONE "WHO'S THIS GIRL THAT'S UPSETTING MY EMPLOYEES" THEY KEEP RUNNING AROUND THE BUSH BECUASE I'VE DONE MY HOMEWORK. RIGHT IS RIGHT FAIR IS FAIR LAW IS THE LAW THATS WHY I NEED YOUR HELP Revdex.com. THANKSDesired Settlement: CLOSED ACCOUNTS! CLEARED OFF MY CREDIT REPORTS AND THE [redacted] DISTRICT COURT.

Business

Response:

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 7, 2013/07/06) */

Below are the responses to [redacted]'s complaint against my office.

1. My office represents [redacted] in two lawsuits that became Judgments. The first matter is [redacted] XXX-XXXXX: Judgment entered on October 28, 2011 for $9,781.61 (hereinafter "Judgment #1"). The second matter is [redacted] XXX-XXXXX: Judgment entered on August 21, 2012 for $11,344.48 (hereinafter "Judgment #2"). In both matters, suit was filed before the expiration of the applicable statute of limitations. Once the case is filed and Judgment obtained, the underlying statute of limitations no longer applies and the Judgments are valid for 10 years with an option to renew for an additional 10 years.

2. The original creditor was [redacted] in both matters. In Judgment #1, the last four digits of the account number with [redacted] was [redacted] In Judgment #2, the last four digits of the account number with [redacted] of [redacted] was [redacted] provided two letters to my client from [redacted] of [redacted] regarding accounts ending in [redacted] and [redacted] neither of which match the two accounts associated with the two judgments in this matter. In addition, the two letters provide the following from [redacted] of [redacted] "Your recent inquiry regarding how the above referenced account is notated on your credit report was received. During our investigation, we found that this account is not reporting to the consumer reporting agencies. At this time, we consider your inquiry resolved. To obtain a copy of your credit report, please contact the consumer reporting agencies at...." The letter then lists four credit reporting agencies. As you can see, these letters apply to two different accounts. In addition, nowhere in the letters does [redacted] of [redacted] state that the accounts were "resolved" or satisfied. Therefore, my client did not consider this proof of payment of the accounts they are handling.

3. The $11,344.00 balance referenced by [redacted] was the amount owing on Judgment #2 (without the 48 cents) and was never the agreed amount settlement amount for both Judgments. [redacted] offered to make monthly payments on reduced balances. The offer was rejected and a counter-offer made by my client. On June 4, 2013, a confirming letter was sent to [redacted] with copies of the two entered Judgments and the settlement offer my client is willing to accept. [redacted] has not accepted the counter-offer from my client.

4. Neither I nor my staff has yelled at, threatened, or lied to [redacted] as she has alleged. I personally have never referred to [redacted] or any other customer as "that girl." After a telephone conversation with [redacted] in my office, which [redacted] perceived to be an abusive customer, [redacted] was referred to my office manager. During the telephone call with [redacted], my office manager placed [redacted] on hold and asked me how to handle what she also perceived as an abusive customer. I instructed my office manager to calmly inform [redacted] that she was terminating the telephone call, which she did. [redacted] then called back and I spoke to her and explained the history of the accounts and the limitations on my settlement authority as an outside attorney. She asked to speak to my client and has been dealing with them directly ever since.

My office is a law firm that represents [redacted] in these two matters. We cannot accept any settlement offers unless authorized by our client. Nothing provided by [redacted] has shown these accounts to be resolved or satisfied. If you have any questions or require any supporting documentation, please do not hesitate to contact me.

I am a debt collector. This communication is an attempt to collect a debt and any information obtained will be used for that purpose.

Final Consumer Response /* (3000, 9, 2013/07/12) */

(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)

I would like to offer three settlememt options. Option #1 Close both accounts due to statue limitation there 2005 accounts, washington has 6yrs statue of limitation there 8yrs ago. Option#2 settle both accounts at no intrest and half of the principal of $3,955.1. Option #3 settle both account's no intrest, principal only $7,930.34. I can provide down payment of $300 starting on Aug 30, 2013 and $150 every 30th of the month until the balance payed off in full. Once settlement offer has been agreed and [redacted] receive's first payment the judgement will be lifted off my credit immediately. We are all adults and professional's I'm glady to say we can resolve this small matter and move forward into the sunset.. Thank you..

Check fields!

Write a review of David B. Schumacher PC

Satisfaction rating
 
 
 
 
 
Upload here Increase visibility and credibility of your review by adding a photo

David B. Schumacher PC Rating

Overall satisfaction rating

Address: 3439 NE Sandy Blvd # 239, Portland, Oregon, United States, 97232-1959

Phone:

+1 (503) 766-4983
Show more...

Website:

www.dbschumacher.com


Add contact information for David B. Schumacher PC

A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z | New | Updated