collections

[rjesse]

Has anyone had Getty successfully send their "invoice" to collections to where it actually appeared on your credit report, damaging your credit?

My understanding is that there has to be a contract for any debt to appear on someone's credit because if there isn't a contract, what's to prevent someone from saying whatever they want like, hey so and so owes my business $X,XXX and I'm reporting it to collections just because.

[SoylentGreen]

This would only occur through a business transaction, wherein goods/services were exchanged, you were invoiced and then you didn't pay.
Or, in the event of a loss in a court case wherein the court determined that you owed a settlement, and then you didn't pay.

If they hire a collections agency to hassle you otherwise, the agency can't really do much.  It's just an intimidation tactic.

One person from Canada who was being hassled by masterfile brought this up on the forum before.
Oddly, masterfile (a Canadian company) had a Florida collections agency contact him/her.
Which makes me suspect that it's illegal to do this in Canada.

If you're contacted by a collections agency, and there's no debt, respond to them in writing of such.

S.G.

[rjesse]

I made the mistake of contacting them to find out what the letter was about and they sent me an email "settlement."  Would that be enough to constitute an invoice or contract for collection purposes?

[Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)]

I doubt it, as it's  a "claim" that you owe them something, unless of cousre you said something along the lines of  "yes I used the image from your site, send me an invoice" then that would be different..

[SoylentGreen]

They would have contacted you with a settlement offer regardless of whether you responded or not.
Even if you admitted using the images, and said that you'd pay it still wouldn't be something that could be sent to 'actual' collections.

In any case Mr Michelen mentioned that:

"You should condition that all your comments/discussion/etc are in the context of potential settlement and therefoer not admissible in federal court under Federal Rules of Evidence 408."

http://www.extortionletterinfo.com/forum/index.php/topic,2125.msg3012.html#msg3012

That's US law of course.  This disclaimer would keep your negotiations out of any potential future court processes.

S.G.

[Bekka]

That's US law of course.  This disclaimer would keep your negotiations out of any potential future court processes.

Well then, I am confused.  I thought the whole reason for contacting MF or Getty, etc. was to make sure you had an offer on the table in case they wanted to sue.  So, are you saying that if you went to court you could not say you offered to pay x number of dollars as a settlement?

[SoylentGreen]

You make a very good point.

The issue that I have about communicating with the copyright trolls is that one could inadvertently say something that could be used in court.
The more that one communicates with them, the riskier it is.

I think that "Federal Rules of Evidence 408" prevents the trolls from using what you say against you.
But there's nothing to stop the alleged infringer from using his/her communications with the trolls as evidence.

So, while Getty (for example) couldn't use your communications with them against you, you could still bring up the fact that you made a settlement offer if necessary.
The worst that they could say about your offer is that "they didn't want it".

So, all bases are covered.

S.G.