SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Last week, the Receivables Management Association International (RMAI) released a white paper analysis of the impact of the Receivables Management Certification Program (RMCP) on litigation. A before-and-after analysis of lawsuits filed against businesses certified through the RMCP found that after certification, litigation against RMAI’s certified businesses, as an average, decreased by 20.8% in the seven-year span from 2012 to 2018. Looking at a breakdown of the litigation by areas of law, the lawsuits filed against violations to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), and the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) experienced similar declines after certification. 

However, during the same time horizon, litigation activity involving companies in the overall accounts receivables industry increased by 3.1%. Lawsuits with FDCPA, FCRA, and TCPA violations experienced a 3.5% decrease, 13.5% increase, and a 26.7% increase, respectively. 

“RMCP certified businesses set the global standard in the industry. The program is designed for consumer protection and industry best practices. The significant decrease in adverse litigation for certified businesses is a testament to the strength of the certification program.” – Rance Willey Chair of the RMAI Certification Council. 

Consumer protection is the primary goal of the RMCP. Because the program’s standards meet, exceed, or are unprecedented in existing state and federal regulations, consumers are assured stronger and more stringent protections when dealing with RMCP certified businesses. 

The correlation between the RMCP and a statistically significant decrease in lawsuits, as well as decreases in specific actions (FDCPA, FCRA, and TCPA) for certified businesses after earning their certification designation, demonstrates the effect of the program’s high standards and focus on accountability. 

The complete whitepaper can be found here. 

A one-page infographic highlighting the results of the analysis can be found here.

About Receivables Management Association International

Receivables Management Association International (RMAI) is the nonprofit trade association that represents more than 500 companies that purchase or support the purchase of performing and nonperforming receivables on the secondary market. The Receivables Management Certification Program and Code of Ethics set the global standard within the receivables industry due to its rigorous uniform industry standards of best practice which focus on the protection of the consumer. RMAI provides its members with extensive networking, educational, and business development opportunities in asset classes that span numerous industries. The association continually sets the standard in the receivables management industry through its highly effective grassroots advocacy, conferences, committees, task forces, publications, webinars, and breaking news alerts. Founded in 1997 as the Debt Buyers Association, RMAI is headquartered in Sacramento, California. 

One litigation defense tool that may be available to debt collectors in Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) cases is moving to compel the arbitration clause and class waiver in the underlying credit agreement. Litigation defense is expensive (as we’ve discussed with the litigation dilemma); arbitration clauses allow debt collectors to limit this exposure and liability.

However, the question of whether a debt collector may enforce such a clause largely depends on the language used by the original creditor in the underlying credit agreement. Below we will explore some examples of when debt collectors were successful and not successful in enforcing the arbitration clause, as well as one way creditors can help in this regard.

When It Works: The Gold Standard of Abritration Clauses

The most recent example of a debt collector successfully compelling arbitration is also the best example of arbitration clause language that supports debt collectors. In George v. Midland Funding, LLC, et al. (D.N.J. 2019), the court granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration despite plaintiff’s opposition. The language in the underlying credit agreement specifically discussed arbitration in the context of debt collection efforts. The agreement states:

Whose claims are subject to arbitration? Not only ours and yours, but also Claims made by or against anyone connected with us or you or claiming through us or such as… [an] affiliated company, predecessor or successor, heir, [or] assignee…

What about debt collections? We and anyone to whom we assign your debt will not initiate an arbitration proceeding to collect a debt from you unless you assert a Claim against us or our assignee. We and any assignee may seek arbitration on an individual basis of any Claim asserted by you, whether in arbitration or any proceeding, including in a proceeding to collect a debt…

The court found this language to be clear cut, concluding:

[T]he Agreement broadly incorporates any claim related to the Agreement, including claims asserted against debt collectors or assignees like Defendants. The Agreement further contains a class action waiver and requires any questions related to arbitrability and the enforceability of the arbitration agreement must be resolved in arbitration. The Court is satisfied that there is a valid agreement to arbitrate and that it covers the claims alleged in the complaint.

Folks, this agreement language is the gold standard when it comes to debt collectors compelling arbitration. The one addition that would make it better is if it included agents as well as assignees.

Other examples of where the court found the arbitration clause applies to debt collectors include:

• Correa v. N. Am. Recovery (N.D. Ill. 2019): The agreement states that the right to arbitrate governs disputes with the bank and any of its assignees. Since defendant was an assignee, the right to arbitrate transferred with the assignment. Since the agreement stated that the arbitration clause covers “any disputes arising from the collection of amounts you owe,” the FDCPA suit falls within the scope of the agreement.
• Brooks v. N.A.R., Inc. (N.D. Ohio 2019): Where the arbitration clause covered creditor and its assignees, and the court found the debt collector to be an assignee of the debt.
• Christensen v. Barclays Bank Del. (D. Mass. 2019): The Court found that the arbitration clause was mandatory and applied to the bank and its “agents,” which the collections law firm qualified as.

[article_ad]

When It Doesn’t Work: Lack of Clarity Regarding Applicability to Debt Collectors

Unfortunately, most underlying credit agreements are not so clear-cut and hit a roadblock when debt collectors attempt to compel the arbitration in court. This usually occurs when the agreement is limited in its description of who the agreement applies to. Many arbitration agreements use the term “assignee,” which is a term that has a specific meaning in the legal context. To put it in non-legalese, assignment involves passing on a certain task and its benefit to another.

Ramirez v. Midland Funding, LLC, et al. (N.D. Ill. 2019) considered this issue. The court here found that while there was a true assignment of rights between the original creditor and debt buyer, the same did not exist between the debt buyer (now the current creditor) and the debt collector. Instead, the court found that this relationship was more reflective of an agency–where the task is assigned by the benefit goes back to the principal company.

But wait, didn’t we say in the above section that in Brooks v. N.A.R. the court found a debt collector to be an assignee? That is where the problem lies: different courts seem to reach different conclusions on whether a debt collector is an assignee. This leads to the next section.

How Creditors Can Help: Clarify Arbitration Clause Language in Credit Agreements

This is easier said than done, but something creditors can do to solve this dilemma is to clarify the language of the arbitration clause in their credit agreements. Simply stating that the clause applies to “assignees” may not be enough. Predicting whether a court will or will not consider a debt collector an assignee is as good as a coin toss. What works? Clearly stating in the underlying credit agreement that the arbitration clause and class waiver apply to debt collectors.

Another thing for creditors to keep in mind if they want to help their debt collectors out is this: timing is everything. Debt collectors will usually require an affidavit from the creditor in order to file a complete motion to compel, and the longer the debt collector has to wait for this, the more likely it becomes that the court will consider the arbitration clause waived.

—

Want to conduct incisive research as shown above in a quick click of a button? Save yourself hours of researching and reading cases by subscribing to iA’s new Case Law Tracker.

The weather is starting to warm up, and sounds of kids running around outside at eleven o’clock in the morning can be heard in the distance. Graduation parties and celebrations are all around. It must mean one thing: it’s finally summer! And while most of us are excited for extra time with friends and family or the beloved summer BBQs, this isn’t everyone’s favorite time. If you are responsible for managing cash, you probably have already forecasted a decrease in receipts. If you are a collections leader, you just know every year at this time there is a dip in collections.

You are probably thinking to yourself, I can’t do anything to make these customers pay on time in the summer. While you can’t physically go and cut the checks for them, you can try to be in front of it as much as possible.

In my prior life, I always had my finger on the pulse. I was always planning and preparing the organization — most importantly, the credit/collections teams. You learn very quickly how cyclical the business can become. I’m going to share my favorite tips and tricks to avoid or significantly decrease that summer cash dip.

The Ideal Solution

Do you know what customer you won’t see a summer dip occur with? An automatic paying customer. Regardless of company shutdowns, planned/unplanned vacations, or summer holidays, these customers are always maximizing their discounts and showing current. (By the way, did you know an automatic customer shows signs of financial distress before a customer who pays by check? Come to our next strategy workshop to learn how and why this is.) Nonetheless, I know we aren’t all fortunate enough to have customers on automatic payment, and not everyone has the technology to process automatic payments. So, I am sharing my recommendations for when the customer isn’t on automatic payment.

Recommendations:

1. Be ahead of the game. Start coaching your collectors in late April to early May to add to the conversation. It can be as simple as saying, “Don’t you just love summer?” Regardless of the customer’s response, the next statement should be, “As you know, we have Memorial Day weekend coming up. Will payments still be made on Friday or because it’s a holiday weekend will they typically send it out the following Friday?”… “Well, Mr./Mrs. Customer, I don’t want to see you experience any late fees, so what we can do is the week before the holiday, we will go ahead and double up. This way your payment is posted, thus ensuring your account remains in good standing through the holiday. Do you have any other vacations or time off as a company planned this summer? We can be sure to do the same thing for those weeks as well.”

2. Follow up. While it’s great to be able to ask the questions and notate the account, it’s even better when you capitalize on why you did that in the first place — no better way than to follow through by taking action on your next conversation. “I see during our last call that we were planning to double up this week on payment. Can we go ahead and process both payments over the phone/online today?” Maintain the urgency by letting the customer know you want to help ensure they don’t experience any loss of discounts or late fees. They will appreciate your thinking ahead. It’s the same process if it was a planned vacation for your customer. Have your collectors make clear notes, set up calendar reminders, and most importantly, get the payment before the business closes, or the check-cutter/-signer is on vacation!

This was the same process I had my collectors take with customers when the collector was going to be out. They asked for the next invoice coming due to be included with the payment. If the customer declined the opportunity, they put an email reminder out for someone else on the team to call. You would be amazed how many customers added the extra payment by request. All it takes is asking for it!

3. July 4th. This year, July 4th is on a Thursday. You will have several customers that choose to shut down for the holiday week. You should be asking today, right now, will they be open the week of the 4th? Go ahead and request to process this week and next week’s payment today over the phone or online to continue maximizing their discounts. You don’t want to come in on July 8th and see a dip in cash because the holiday fell on a Thursday. By the way, most businesses cut their payments on Thursdays and Fridays. If you aren’t asking for that payment, they will fall past due. If your collector is calling on a customer that you could have “pre-collected,” could they be missing out on a more significant customer who is beginning to experience financial distress? Being in front of this ensures your collector’s list doesn’t look like a roller coaster of ups and downs.

4. After the fireworks are over. Don’t let your collector let their foot off the gas pedal just yet. Keep talking to the customer about the upcoming weeks left of summer. “Can we expect payment as usual or do you know of a week that payment will not be sent due to a company shut down or employee-planned vacations?” Keep having the collectors reiterate you want to help the customer ensure they continue maximizing their available discounts.

How great would it be to look back at the cash projections and see continued stability throughout the summer months? These above tips, if executed ahead of time, really can curb or eliminate future summer dips. The buses are back on the road, the weather is cooling off, and you see all the first day of school pictures! You can breathe a sigh of relief that summer is over! But wait, start planning now for the final quarter of 2019!

In closing, don’t be afraid to train your collectors to ask for the next payment. It’s fine to ask a customer what their plans are and how it might impact payment. If you plan and execute starting in late April and early May, you won’t have a hole to climb out of going into the final three months of the year. The collector being out of the office can affect a customer’s payment just as much as the customer being out of the office. Lastly, take these steps and be proactive versus reactive; everyone will be high-fiving.

I hope you see purposeful decision-making throughout the steps mentioned above. If not, feel free to reach out to me via email at keich@theiainstitute.com. I would love to hear your thoughts. Even better, #ChimeIn on my personal LinkedIn page where this article will be shared and published for open comments.

I look forward to seeing you at our upcoming strategy workshop this December in Scottsdale, Arizona, and helping your organization maximize revenue without increasing your bad debt!

We have yet another interesting TCPA arbitration decision out of a California federal court to share with TCPAWorld. The court was tasked with deciding two issues: whether an arbitration agreement contained in a hyperlinked “terms and conditions” disclosure is enforceable, and, if so, who makes the critical decision of arbitrability – the court or the arbitrator. The court answered both questions in favor of the defendant, Move, Inc. (“Move”). The decision is styled Silverman v. Move, Inc., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 105365 (N.D. Cal. June 24, 2019).

Let’s break the case down a bit because its importance requires getting into a bit of the nitty-gritty of the facts.

[article_ad]

Interestingly, the case involves a TCPA dispute between a Florida realtor and the entities behind the website Realtor.com. According to the court, Realtor.com allows realtors “to market homes to consumers” and “to develop leads on consumers’ behalves.” The website is operated by Move on behalf of the National Association of Realtors pursuant to a licensing agreement and, through this agreement, Move “promote[s] Realtor.com and its services to real estate professionals.”

In order to “connect[] consumers to real estate agents,” Realtor.com (through Move) allows real estate agents, such as plaintiff, to purchase “lead-generation products.” Plaintiff purchased one such service, called a “Connections” service. To purchase the product, plaintiff was required to place her order over the phone with a Move account executive, who was “trained to inform Connections purchasers that they will receive an email containing written confirmation of their order . . . providing all of the details and important information about their purchase and agreement with Move.”

Following her order, plaintiff received her email confirmation, which included a link to the “terms and conditions” (“TOCs”) that “apply to [her] order[.]” The email went on to provide that, “[b]y accessing or using any product or service included in your order and/or by not cancelling your order [within three days], you agree to these [TOCs].”

Per Move’s TOCs, they apply “to the provision of any Content” exchanged between the user and Move, “regardless of whether or not such Content is provided in connection with an Order.” Relevantly, the TOCs also included the following arbitration agreement:

You and Move agree that any and all disputes or claims that may arise between you and Move shall be resolved exclusively through final and binding arbitration, rather than in court, except that you may assert claims in small claims court if your claims qualify. The Federal Arbitration Act shall govern the interpretation and enforcement of this section 19. You agree that You and Move may bring claims against each other only on an individual basis and not as part of any purported class or representative action or proceeding. . . . The arbitration will be conducted by the American Arbitration Association (“AAA”) under its rules and procedures, as modified by this section 19. The AAA’s rules are available at www.adr.org. . . . The arbitrator’s award shall be final and binding and judgment on the award rendered by the arbitrator may be entered in any court having jurisdiction thereof. Payment of all filing, administration and arbitrator fees will be governed by the AAA’s rules, unless otherwise stated in this section 19.2. If a court decides that any part of this section 19.2 is invalid or unenforceable, the other parts of this section 19.2 shall still apply.

Relevant to plaintiff’s TCPA claims, “Move gives real estate professionals the ability to receive text alerts containing information that might be of interest to them.” While a “Connections” customer, plaintiff signed up for text message alerts from Move but later opted out. She claims that Move continued to text her even after she submitted her opt-out notice, and she filed suit seeking to assert individual and class-based TCPA claims against Move. Move “moved” to compel the dispute to arbitration based on the arbitration agreement.

The Court granted the motion to compel arbitration. Being contested were two issues: (1) whether the court or an arbitrator should determine questions of “arbitrability”; and (2) whether the arbitration agreement was unenforceable as an impermissible “browsewrap” agreement.

As to the first issue, the Court relied heavily on the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Henry Schein, Inc. v. Archer & White Sales, Inc., 139 S. Ct. 524, 527 (2019), which explains that when “[a] contract ‘clear[ly] and unmistakab[ly]’ delegates [arbitrability] to the arbitrator ‘a court may not override the contract.’”

Applying that rule to the case, the Silverman court found in favor of Move. Importantly, by explicit reference, the arbitration agreement stated that the Federal Arbitration Act, which “reflects a strong policy in favor of arbitration,” governs its interpretation and enforcement. From there, the court was persuaded that the arbitrability of plaintiff’s TCPA dispute must be decided by an AAA arbitrator because the agreement “expressly incorporate[s] the AAA rules,” and prior Ninth Circuit precedent holds that, where the parties are “both sophisticated,” “incorporation of the AAA rules constitutes clear and unmistakable evidence that contracting parties agreed to arbitrate arbitrability.” (citing Brennan v. Opus Bank, 796 F.3d 1125, 1130 (9th Cir. 2015)). The court found that plaintiff was a “sophisticated party” because “she has over 16 years’ experience in the complex real estate industry, and she teaches contract and negotiation classes.”

The court rejected plaintiff’s argument that a contrary result was required because of the agreement’s reference to a “court” having the ability to determine whether “any part of this [section] is invalid or enforceable.” The court rejected this argument because “the AAA rules are incorporated as a substantive element of the arbitration provision, [and] the language [p]laintiff points to is included in a severability provision only.” (Emphasis added).

As to the second issue, the court held that plaintiff was, at least, on “inquiry notice” of Move’s TOCs. Pertinently, “[t]hough [p]laintiff did not have actual notice of the TOC, she does not dispute that the Move account executive to whom she spoke on the phone informed her that she would be receiving written confirmation of her order and that it would contain ‘all of the details and important information about [her] purchase and agreement with Move.’” Because she was provided with this clear notice that she would receive further details about her “agreement with Move,” and because she “continued to use the [Connections] service and did not cancel within three days,” the arbitration agreement was enforceable and her “failure . . . to review the confirmatory email or the TOC does not change th[at] fact.”

Thus the Silverman court enforced the arbitration agreement and left all remaining arguments within the jurisdiction of the AAA arbitrator.

Silverman presents a couple of important takeaways for our readers. First, as we recently blogged, arbitration agreements are effective tools and should be sought out and employed as one of a defendant’s first lines of attack. Second, if an agreement to arbitrate is not explicitly presented to a consumer during a transaction, as many are not in our increasingly inter-connected world, then explicit instructions should be given to the consumer to review the relevant TOCs and that their continued use of the offered service constitutes acceptance of the full agreement (although, the burden may be higher if a non-sophisticated party is on the receiving end). Finally, to reserve issues of arbitrability to an arbitrator, it helps to explicitly incorporate the relevant rules of the chosen arbitration service as a substantive component of any arbitration agreement.

Until next time.

—

Editor’s note: This article is provided through a partnership between insideARM and Squire Patton Boggs LLP, which provides a steady stream of timely, insightful and entertaining takes on TCPAWorld.com of the ever-evolving, never-a-dull-moment Telephone Consumer Protection Act. Squire Patton Boggs LLP—and all insideARM articles—are protected by copyright. All rights are reserved. 

Editor’s Note: This article was originally published on the Maurice Wutscher blog and is republished here with permission.

—

On April 30, Washington Gov. Jay Inslee signed into law Substitute House Bill 1531 which places new requirements on medical debt collectors.  The new provisions go into effect on July 28, 2019.

The new law requires medical debt collectors to inform consumers in the initial written communication of the right to request the original account number, date of last payment and an itemized statement regarding the debt.  For hospital debt, the communication must also notify consumers they “may be eligible for charity care from the hospital, together with the contact information for the hospital.”

Upon an oral or written request for itemization, a debt collector must cease collection activity until it provides the itemization free of charge.  The itemization must include:

1. The name and address of the medical creditor;
2. The date, dates, or date range of service;
3. The health care services provided to the patient as indicated by the health care provider in a statement provided to the licensee;
4. The amount of principal for any medical debt or debts incurred;
5. Any adjustment to the bill, such as negotiated insurance rates or other discounts;
6. The amount of any payments received, whether from the patient or any other party;
7. Any interest or fees; and
8. Whether the patient was found eligible for charity care or other reductions and, if so, the amount due after all charity care and other reductions have been applied to the itemized statement.

[article_ad]

The new law also caps the prejudgment interest rate on medical debt at nine percent and, “[f]or any medical debt for which prejudgment interest has accrued or may be accruing as of the effective date of this section, no prejudgment interest in excess of nine percent shall accrue thereafter.”

With nary a dissenting voice, the House Subcommittee on Communications and Technology yesterday afternoon approved and sent to the full House Committee on Energy and Commerce an amended Stopping Bad Robocalls Act, H.R. 3375.

The Subcommittee adopted four bipartisan amendments, all on a voice vote.

• The Locking Up Robocallers Act, H.R. 3225, which TCPAWorld previously reported on, originally introduced by Congressman Donald McEachin (D-VA) was added to the bill.

• The Tracing Back and Catching Unlawful Robocallers Act, H.R. 3434, introduced only yesterday by Congressman G.K. Butterfield (D-NC) was added to the bill. It would require the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to publish an annual report on the telecommunication industry’s efforts to trace suspected illegal robocalls to their origins and provide a list of voice service providers who are not sufficiently participating in efforts to stop illegal calls.

• The Subcommittee adopted an amendment offered by Congresswoman Yvette Clarke (D-NY) and supported by Congressman Tim Walberg (R-MI) and others, addressing one-ring robocalls, presumably modeled on the Ending One-Ring Scams Act of 2019, H.R. 3264.

• Finally, the Spam Calls Task Force Act of 2019, H.R. 721, originally sponsored by Congressman Charlie Crist (D-FL), was added to the bill. That bill calls for the Attorney General to convene an interagency working group to study enforcement of Section 227(b) of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA).

The only other amendment discussed was offered and then withdrawn by Congresswoman Anna Eshoo (D-CA). It would have added her Help Americans Never Get Unwanted Phone Calls (HANGUP) Act, H.R. 1421, to the bill, that would repeal the debt collection exemption added to the TCPA in 2015.

[article_ad]

With that, Subcommittee Chairman Michael Doyle (D-PA) sought and obtained a unanimous voice vote to move the amended bill on to the full House Committee on Energy and Commerce for any potential further markup. That meeting seems unlikely to occur until after the coming Fourth of July recess. TCPAWorld will, of course, report and cover this next step toward robocall legislation in 2019.

—

Editor’s note: This article is provided through a partnership between insideARM and Squire Patton Boggs LLP, which provides a steady stream of timely, insightful and entertaining takes on TCPAWorld.com of the ever-evolving, never-a-dull-moment Telephone Consumer Protection Act. Squire Patton Boggs LLP—and all insideARM articles—are protected by copyright. All rights are reserved. 

Atlanta, GA — The FFAM360 Group of Companies (“FFAM360”), a world-class organization that provides revenue-centric solutions that specifically address all phases of the credit and revenue lifecycle, is excited to announce the launch of FFAM360 Staffing, a new and innovative division of the FFAM360 group of companies. FFAM360 Staffing delivers revolutionary temporary staffing solutions within the healthcare markets utilizing the latest technology and workforce analytics to deliver best-in-class staffing and recruitment experience for its clients.

“FFAM360 is known for its comprehensive and innovative services across the credit and revenue lifecycle. The decision to expand our presence into the staffing, recruiting, and workforce solutions industry is a high-value addition the supply-chain that we already deliver to our clientele, and is a strategic augmentation to our business growth strategy,” says FFAM360 President and Chief Investment Officer Matthew Maloney. “Our metropolitan areas are rich with talented and skilled professionals and this expansion increases our ability to more comprehensively service our clients’ unique needs. Whether employers need a contract engagement, seasonal engagement, or permanent placement, both employers and candidates benefit from the flexible staffing solutions that FFAM360 Staffing provides. We will continue to draw on our decades of experience to push the boundaries of staffing services innovation while remaining focused on delivering the outstanding services and customized solutions within the healthcare industry for which we are known.” 

Revolutionary Staffing Solutions

Since 2002, FFAM360 has delivered some of the most ground-breaking and successful solutions in healthcare revenue cycle management, accounts receivable management, business process outsourcing, and receivable purchasing and finance that address the growing needs of hospitals and healthcare providers. The addition of FFAM360 Staffing is an excellent complement to the Company’s comprehensive and customized services. Understanding the unique needs within the healthcare industry, FFAM360 Staffing delivers flexible and immediate solutions that match each client’s needs. Utilizing proprietary methods to search, identify, and screen potential candidates, FFAM360 Staffing provides high-quality remote and on-site staffing solutions that include:

• Remote-Temporary Staffing
• Traditional Temporary Staffing
• Temp-To-Hire Opportunities
• Direct Hire Introductions
• Project Resolution- Remote or On-Site
• Interim Management Partnerships
• Executive Placement Program

[article_ad]

The FFAM360 family of companies are some of the most recognized financial institutions specializing in accounts receivable management. The opportunity to expand into staffing accommodates the accelerated needs in the healthcare industry, one of the highest growth industries in the world. By carefully matching each employee’s unique skill sets with specific client needs, FFAM360 Staffing consistently delivers a staffing & recruitment process that produces successful outcomes for our clients and is truly world-class.

To learn more about FFAM360 Staffing services, our solutions for clients, and career opportunities for employees, visit our website or call us at 800-542-8714. The solution to your staffing and career needs is just a click or a phone call away. 

About FFAM360 Staffing

FFAM360 Staffing is a division of FFAM360, a world-class organization that provides revenue-centric solutions that address all phases of the credit and revenue lifecycle. FFAM360 Staffing creates strategic staffing solutions that connect highly-qualified candidates with positions, saving employers time and money. We have invested in technology, analytics, and developed industry relationships that enable us to find the perfect fit for both employers and job-seekers. FFAM360 has the distinct honor of being registered and certified as a women-owned business enterprise by the Women’s Business Enterprise Council (WBENC). The FFAM360 family of Companies was founded in 2002 and is headquartered just outside Atlanta, GA, with satellite offices in Phoenix, AZ and Paso Robles, CA. 

WEST MONROE, La.—Today, Gov. John Bel Edwards and CEO Brian Davis and President Everett Stagg of Coast Professional Inc. announced the company will create 146 new direct jobs in an expansion of its West Monroe contact center. Operating in Ouachita Parish since 2007, Coast Professional will maintain its 9,000-square-foot office on Expo Circle while adding a new 8,200-square-foot facility on Downing Pines Road.

With the expansion, Coast Professional will make a $750,000 capital investment and retain 125 existing jobs. The new project will add 146 direct jobs with an average annual salary of more than $36,500, plus benefits. In addition, Louisiana Economic Development estimates the project will result in 85 new indirect jobs, for a total of 231 new jobs in Ouachita Parish and Northeast Louisiana.

[article_ad]

“Coast Professional’s latest outbound contact center will bring immediate career opportunities to the people of West Monroe and surrounding areas,” Gov. Edwards said. “We’re proud to be assembling a team of state and regional workforce partners who will help Coast Professional meet its immediate hiring needs for this expansion, and we’ll be announcing more details about the hiring plans in the very near future.”

To prepare for its growth, Coast Professional will be converting a former Sears Hometown store and renovating the interior space and parking area to accommodate the new workforce. The company specializes in outbound calls to resolve debt for federal customers.

“Coast has seen significant growth over the past year and is looking to add to our ever-growing team,” said Stagg, who also serves as co-chairman of the Shareholders Board at Coast Professional. “The new location is a milestone within our company’s history and is a culmination of many years of effort, planning, and success. I want to thank the North Louisiana Economic Partnership, the Ouachita Workforce Development Board 81, the City of West Monroe, Louisiana Economic Development, Louisiana Workforce Commission and the Governor’s Office for their support in making this happen. As we enter a new chapter, we’re looking for candidates that have the enthusiasm to learn, bring their A-game every day, and who are looking to enhance their financial futures.”

LED FastStart® – the nation’s top-ranked state workforce program – will guide recruitment efforts for Coast Professional while the Louisiana Workforce Commission and the regional Workforce Development Board Area 81 will lead training efforts for new Coast Professional personnel.

“The Louisiana Workforce Commission is proud to partner with Coast Professional,” said Secretary Ava Dejoie. “This call center is a direct investment in Louisiana’s workforce, and the LWC prides itself on providing workforce development stimulation for job-seekers and employers through training initiatives, such as Registered Apprenticeship and the Incumbent Worker Training Program.”

“The Ouachita Workforce Development Board 81 is so pleased and overwhelmingly appreciative to be a part of Coast Professional’s expansion to our area,” said Doretha Bennett, the workforce board’s executive director. “We will continue our support for such an essential action and progress.”

The North Louisiana Economic Partnership and West Monroe officials offered strategic support to Coast Professional to make the expansion project possible.

“The City of West Monroe is extremely pleased to support the expansion of Coast Professional, a longtime existing West Monroe company,” Mayor Staci Mitchell said. “The city worked with several partner organizations to offer a competitive incentive package that allowed this West Monroe business to expand locally instead of in another state. Our leadership has worked diligently to create a pro-business environment, conducive to economic development.”

“North Louisiana Economic Partnership congratulates Coast Professional on expanding its presence in West Monroe,” said NLEP President Scott Martinez. “NLEP worked with a team of state, regional, local and workforce partners to create an economic incentive package and workforce solutions that brought this economic development project to West Monroe.”

NLEP and the State of Louisiana began discussing a potential project with Coast Professional earlier this year. The company is expected to utilize Louisiana’s Enterprise Zone Program, which includes a tax credit of up to $3,500 for each net new job created.

Details on the hiring process for interested job candidates will be announced soon, with Coast Professional planning to move into its new facility and begin operations there before the end of the year.

About Coast Professional, Inc.

Coast Professional, Inc. is an accounts receivable management company, dedicated to the respectful and ethical collection of higher education and government debt. Coast provides professional collection services to over 200 campus-based colleges, universities, and government clients. Coast is a five-time honoree on the Inc. 5000 list for American’s Fastest-Growing Private Companies provided by Inc. Magazine and in 2019, was recognized for the fourth time as one of the “Best Places to Work In Collections” by insideARM.com and Best Companies Group. Since 1976, Coast has worked closely with clients to increase recoveries by assisting consumers in resolving their financial obligations. Coast’s success is exemplified by exceptional recoveries, superior service, and dedication to the highest levels of compliance. More information about Coast can be found at www.coastprofessional.com

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) filed its semiannual regulatory agenda on June 21, 2019. The agenda discusses the many rulemaking initiatives undergone by the Bureau recently, including the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on debt collection (NPRM). The agenda states that the NPRM “address[es] such issues as communication practices and consumer disclosures in the debt collection market.”

The agenda continues:

This proposal builds on research and pre-rulemaking activities regarding the debt collection market, which remains a top source of complaints to the Bureau. The Bureau has also received encouragement from industry and consumer groups to engage in rulemaking to address how to apply the 40-year old Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) to modern collection practices.

Other rulemaking activities outlined by the Bureau in the agenda include clarification regarding amendments to the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HDMA), reconsideration of the Payday Rules, and forthcoming continuation on rules to implement section 1071 of the Dodd-Frank Act, which amended the Equal Credit Opportunity Act.

[article_ad]

insideARM Perspective

The CPFB has certainly had a busy year all-around, and the proposed debt collection rules seem to make up a good portion of it. After many years of research and preparation, the NPRM was released on May 7. The following day, Director Kathleen Kraninger hosted a debt collection Town Hall in Philadelphia, where Stephanie Eidelman, the Executive Director of the Consumer Relations Consortium and CEO of The iA Institute, spoke as a panelist.

The NPRM was officially published in the Federal Register on May 21, triggering the clock to submit comments (which are due by August 19, 2019). Consumers, consumer advocates, senators, and industry members have already begun submitting comments; fifty-seven have been submitted thus far. Many more are likely to come in the next few months as everyone digests and thoughtfully prepares their response to the 500+ page NPRM.

On June 17, 2019, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) filed a lawsuit against Grand Teton Professionals, LLC, a credit repair organization, and other corporate defendants.

The FTC alleges that Grand Teton Professionals charged illegal upfront fees for credit repair services. It also alleges that the organization threatened legal action against consumers who complained about the lack of results or the illegal upfront fees. The FTC adds in its press release:

The defendants offered consumers the option of financing these substantial fees, but failed to make critical required disclosures. When the defendants processed fees, they routinely engaged in electronic fund transfers from consumers’ bank accounts without obtaining proper authorization. The defendants often used illegal remotely created checks to pay for the credit repair services they offered through telemarketing, according the FTC’s complaint.

The judge granted a temporary restraining order against that ceased defendants’ operations and froze their assets.

[article_ad]