Allied Interstate has negotiated a settlement of their bad practices in the State of Minnesota, but a whole new crop of law suits are on the rise in other states. The original article I wrote about Allied Interstate caused quite a stir among readers. I appreciate the significant number of opinions and comments from consumer readers willing to tell of their horror stories with unscrupulous activities of collection agency predators.
I also, appreciate the curious comment I received from a new writer for Associated Content who goes by the name of Allied Rep. He in essence disagrees with the article and believes the article is dumb and uneducated. He states he is in the St. Cloud, Minnesota area. This is one of the bases of Allied Interstate. There was also a comment that stuck out as funny because it was a made by a reader not a member of AC who said Allied Interstate helped him or her to correct and remedy credit problems. I have reviewed current activity of Allied Interstate and this article addresses some concerns and resources available to consumers in the various states.
In the Commonwealth of Virginia a suit has been filed against Allied Interstate. The case is Clinton vs. Allied Interstate et al., the docket number is 1. 2007 cv00434, filed on April 30, 2007. It will be tried in the Eastern Virginia court in Alexandria, Virginia. The complaint alleges violations of the Fair Debt Collection Act. In the State of Indiana another federal law suit was filed against Allied Interstate on April 18, 2007. The case is Reasoner vs. Allied Interstate, case number 1:2007cv00488. The plaintiff Lori Reasoner also claims violations of the federal Fair Debt Collections Act. It will be tried in Indianapolis, Indiana.
In recent days the United States Supreme Court took up the issue of adverse credit reporting and its effect on insurance companies charging auto policy applicants a higher rate. The question came down to not if the auto insurer would have charged the same rate had they not read the credit report, but the fact the company had read the report. Most insurance companies do use credit score in assessing the rate they will charge to consumers for auto insurance.
The case presented to the Supreme Court involved a person who got the higher rate, but the rate would have been the same had the insurance company not read the report. In the case the Supreme Court reasoned that the Fair Credit Act requires the insurance company to send a “notice” of the adverse action whether the applicant would have received the higher rate or not. The “notice,” has pertinent information regarding the sources of the “adverse action,” which the consumer has the right to know and possibly remedy if there are errors. The case is Safeco Insurance Co. vs Burr et al and a companion case Geico vs Edo et al., decided June 4, 2007. These cases can be read here.
Some interesting reading material on the subject of Allied Interstate and other collection activity of mistaken identity can be seen at http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2006/09/13/debt_collectors_hunt_the_innocent/?page=4. The stories are grim and the tactics unrelenting even when the consumer tries to resolve the mistaken debt collection.
Another great source and I am not recommending sending in your fee to this web site, but simply to read the list of horror stories is http://www.mycollector.com/news_allied.html. The list of horrific stories is tremendous. I am not advocating signing up with this service, because I have not had the opportunity to review the legitimacy of the site. It is good to read for the sole purpose of knowing you are not alone in the long list of complaints against Allied Interstate.
Check with your state attorney general and find out if your state is interested in pursuing predatory collection activity. Most attorney general offices do have a consumer fraud section and consumer protection division.
Reference:
- Law Blog
