Oops..Collection Firm Gets Hammered for Dragging Wrong Man to Court

[richlevy]

From here

The phone rang. A woman from a law firm representing a collection agency wanted to know if Mark Hoyte was Mark Hoyte, and he said he was. They were calling to collect $919 on a Sears-Citi card.

A judge ruled that Mark Hoyte was entitled to be compensated wages lost the day he was summoned to court. He was wrongly sued for credit card debt.


Mr. Hoyte said he never had that credit card.
Then the woman wanted to know if his Social Security number ended in 92, and Mr. Hoyte said no, it ended in 33.
“She says to me, ‘Your date of birth is in 1972,’ ” Mr. Hoyte, 46, recalled in an interview.
Clearly, they had the wrong Mark Hoyte. But that did not stop the lawyers at Pressler & Pressler from suing him. They swore out a complaint and sent a summons to Mr. Hoyte, ordering him to be in court last Monday.

“Why didn’t you check these things out before you take out a summons and a complaint?” Judge Dear asked. “Why don’t you check out who you’re going after?”
Mr. Wang said that Pressler & Pressler used an online database called AnyWho to hunt for debtors.
“So you just shoot in the dark against names; if there’s 16 Mark Hoytes, you go after without exactly knowing who, what, when and where?” Judge Dear asked.

The answer, of course is that so far the entire legal system has accepted sloppiness on the part of businesses, including collection firms and banks and completely disregarded lost time and aggravation to civilians forced to deal with the consequences. Pressler & Pressler didn't think it would cost them anything to be wrong - but this time it did.

The judge said he was prepared to dismiss the case and wanted Mr. Hoyte compensated for lost wages.
“Your honor,” Mr. Wang said, “I’m personally not willing to compensate him.”
No, the judge said; he meant that the law firm, Pressler & Pressler — one of the biggest in the collection industry — should pay the $115. He would hold a sanctions hearing, a formal process of penalizing the law firm for suing the wrong man.

FINALLY!

[xoxoxoBruce]

Oh, it gets better. Mr Wang is just that... an arrogant prick lawyer.

Under questioning by the judge, Mr. Hoyte recounted being called about the debt, providing his Social Security number and date of birth, and being summoned to court anyhow.

The collections lawyer then began to interrogate Mr. Hoyte.

“You claim you told Pressler & Pressler it wasn’t you,” Mr. Wang said to Mr. Hoyte. “Did you send them proof, as in a copy of your Social Security number with only the last four digits visible?”

“No,” Mr. Hoyte said. “They didn’t ask for it.”

“But you didn’t send any written proof of the claim that it was not you?” Mr. Wang said.

“I told them on the phone it’s not me,” Mr. Hoyte said.

Mr. Wang appeared outraged.

“So without any written proof that it’s not you, you would expect someone just, you know, to go on say-so?” he demanded. “Is that correct?”

Alice had reached Wonderland: The lawyer who had sued the wrong man was blaming the wrong man for getting sued.

Judge Dear cut off the questioning. He told Mr. Wang and Mr. Hoyte to come back to court in January.

“If, somehow, counsel, you decide that you’re going to compensate him for his time off,” Judge Dear said, “I will reconsider sanctions.”

Throw the fucking book at 'em, your honor.

[Trilby]

First, we kill all the lawyers...


after hundreds of years, it's still the best advice going.

[SamIam]

I have a pretty common last name and my Dad had a semi-common first name. I remember once when I was kid some men showed up at the house wanting to repossess our TV. My Mom called my Dad who came home from work to straighten things out. As soon as he walked through the door, the repo guy saw that he had the wrong SamIam family. We had other mix ups as well.

[xoxoxoBruce]

As soon as he walked through the door, the repo guy saw that he had the wrong SamIam family.

Was it the shotgun that convinced him?

[breakingnews]

Interesting. We hired Pressler & Pressler to collect on delinquent accounts after my dad closed his practice - in 1993 - and we still regularly receive checks from them today.

I never realized they had such a bad rep. Or that they would pursue bad accounts for 16 years.

[joelnwil]

It is wrong to suggest sending a Social Security number. After all, how was he supposed to know that this was not an identity theft scam in the first place.

[Radar]

I love how the lawyer wants people to prove that they are NOT someone when it's their job to prove that someone IS who they are after.

[chrisinhouston]

It seems improbable that they would have sued for a debt of only $919!

[Trilby]

Originally Posted by chrisinhouston

It seems improbable that they would have sued for a debt of only $919!

Huh. They'll sue for less.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Sure will, a lot less. Consider this case, it isn't like they spent a lot on trying to collect. Half-assed fact gathering, and I'm betting Mr Wang was at the courthouse most of the day, just processing a briefcase full of summonses. Go through the motions for the ones that don't show, settle in the hall with half the others. Most of the work is done by the court and paid for by the taxpayers.

[SamIam]

I got sued when I wrote a check that bounced for a pizza (its a long story). Anyway, the pizza company turned it over to a collection agency which morphed the original $18.00 into something like $100.00 with fines, fees, and assesments. The collection agency dragged a bunch of people including myself. When my turn came to go before the judge, he looked at the collection agent with real disgust, and threw out his case against me as frivilous. I'm sure he billed the pizza company some extorbitant amount for his time in court.

[wolf]

Although it typically stopped short of going to court, one of my friends had this happen a lot. It's part of the cost of doing business as a Smith (by name, not by profession, in this case).