The FTC’s report that recently came out shows an increased number of complaints about debt collectors last year, including a bulleted list of what debt collectors are prohibited from doing. By a careful study of this list you will be prepared if you suspect a violation of your rights. The FTC advises that your report law breaking debt collectors to the Consumer Reports Center at 1-888-FTC-HELP. But what happens after a person submits a complaint to the FTC? Do debt collector complaints to the FTC actually make a difference?

What happens first with the FTC is that they launch an investigation into your complaint and its allegations with the debt collector. Then, according to the FTC’s 33rd annual report on the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), if the investigation is to turn up a violation or unlawful activity, the FTC possibly will proceed in one of the following ways:

1) Through its own attorneys, the FTC can file suit in federal court seeking preliminary and permanent injunctive relief, restitution for consumers, disgorgement of ill-gotten gains, and other ancillary relief.

OR

2) Call for the Department of Justice to file suit in federal court on behalf of the FTC, in quest of a civil penalty, other financial relief, and injunctive relief that would prohibit the bill collector from continuing to violate the FDCPA.

Over the last year, the FTC has only filed three law enforcement actions, which doesn’t sound like a large amount considering they received approximately 140,036 complaints concerning debt collectors in the last 12 months. But not all complaints are warranted and three proceedings that are pending probably will have an affect on many thousands of consumers:

• A settlement imposing the biggest civil punishment ever in an FTC debt collection case ($2.8 million). Along with other stuff, West Asset Management is accused of calling consumers and third parties again and again with sole intent to harass or infuriate, and revealing debts to unauthorized third parties and calling those people for reasons other than to obtain location information about the consumer who is claimed to owe a debt.

• A constant suit against debt collectors who have violated laws when collecting online payday loans. Particularly the defendants are accused of erroneously claiming to consumers’ employers that they were entitled by law to garnish wages without first obtaining a court order for such; erroneously claiming to have informed consumers of their intentions on garnishing wages and that they have already provided consumers with the opportunity to dispute the debt; and by communicating with other consumers’ uninvolved employers and co-workers about debts without the consumers’ knowledge or permission.

• A settlement with a major debt industry collector that allegedly failed to provide verification of disputed debts which resulted in a civil fine of $1.75 million. Allied Interstate Inc., is being accused of continuing collection efforts even after consumers had told the company that they did not owe the alleged debt, without verifying the accuracy of the disputed account information or otherwise having a realistic basis for claiming that the consumers owed the debt.

Even if while on the outside three law enforcement actions in the course of 12 months doesn’t sound like a whole lot, the collective power of each person’s complaints gives the FTC the ammunition it needs to go after the largest offenders.