Attempting to Settle

Thanks for all the advice!

Interestingly just as I was reading Pigeon's  article I received a call (at work which is illegal as they have been informed in writing this is forbidden) that they will be sending in my proposal today for the original stated settlement amount. 

They did say however that CIBC is likely to turn it down and he expects them to ask for 55% of the total debt (less than the offer I made...and much more than I have).  NCO said they would put forward the proposal on the condition that I attempt to come up with the additional funds.  It is extremely unlikely that I will be able to do so as my original offer is already a personal loan and was very difficult in itself.

I will update you all as things progress.  It will likely be early next week (2 business days) when I get a response.

Hoping

Withnail,

55% is a pretty decent deal Once again just my opinion but I would bet that 55% is your pre-approved settlement percentage. Given what we know of CA's, can you really see a representative of NCO calling the bank with the following conversation:

NCO: Hello bank representative, Withnail has proposed that s/he can pay off the loan for (whatever your proposal was). Is that OK?

Bank: NO NCO. That is not suitable. S/he must pay 55%!!

NCO: Shucks. Well, I thought I would give it a try. I'll have to call them back and give them the bad news.

Ten to one the banks have already told NCO that they will settle at 55% and NCO is already aware that 55% is the magic number. The reason banks send the files to CA's is so they don't have to bother with it. I would think that banks don't want to deal with CA's constantly calling them with proposals. It's far more probable that there is some standard settlement rule.

Regardless, best of luck and I hope it works out!!

PS: If we accept the fact that the banks have a standard settlement percentage (ie. 55%), what happens to the extra money when someone settles by paying more because the proposal never comes up?

Thanks Pigeon,

If NCO does in fact have a pre-set limit of 55% (which does seem to make sense)....does this mean that if my offer is declined and I cannot come up with the extra amount I will be starting the whole process over again with payment arguements????  Do you think there is room for negotiation beneath the 55% or is this a firm limit set by CIBC?

I spent three years in Europe hassle free.  If I have to continue the daily phone calls with these people I am really going to think about leaving again.  In the big picture the loan is such a small thing and yet it has managed to essentially destroy my life.

At this point I would recommend to anyone interested in gaining an education to avoid doing so unless they can pay for the tuition, living expenses, books and time off work up front (essentially this would be students with wealthy parents). 

God this has all made me bitter! 

I finally settled the account on Friday.  NCO Financial agreed to a settlement offer a week earlier and wanting everything to go through smoothly after a year and a half of hell I directly requested John LeBlanc's help. He took over Power of Attorney and was provided a copy of the contract I received.  Even at this late stage in the game I am so happy to have had John on my side.  The rep at NCO in what can only be one last chance at a malicious blow called my wife with a wakeup call to bellow in her ear that he needed to speak to me immediately.  He knew I was at work and also knew that the POA didn't kick in for another two hours.  As well they had 'Without Prejudice' written on the contract.  Apparently this could have allowed them to back track once payment was received, renege on the contract and demand further payments.  This was my greatest fear as I had witnessed the tactics of these snakes first hand for such an extended period of time and was sure they had further tricks planned.  John had this removed after taking it up with the head of NCO Financial Ernie Wanchuck (?). 

In fact the dirtiest players in this whole experience were situated earlier on when my debt lay with the Edmonton Office.  The manager Michelle Holmes was by far the worst.  Daily and numerous phone calls to my home and work were her forte. Threats and phone hang-ups were her only method of communication.  She excelled at harassment.  Her sidekick Ron Hansen was not much better.  He started out friendly but ended up using any and all information that I provided him in good faith against me.  He taught me a valuable lesson in trust...one which I hope my children will never have to learn about the darker nature of the human spirit. All in all this company used the filthiest of tactics, often crossing legal lines in order to extract from me what I was trying to pay them anyway.  When the pressure became too severe I phoned my original contact at CIBC where the loan came from and was told that all communication had to be through NCO Financial.  During this entire ordeal my health and relationships have suffered.  I have been diagnosed with anti depressant and anti anxiety medication.  I haven’t had a good night’s sleep in well over a year. 

The assumption at NCO Financial in general is that everyone is trying to get out of paying their debts.  They are not open to the possibility that some people are truly struggling and are suffering to make payments.   In the end not only were their tactics not effective but were in fact counter productive.  

The amount that I settled for was less than the total debt and was put forward by an acquaintance to get me away from this organization.  I now have a payment plan established with this individual and can begin to rebuild my credit.  Best of all I am not living in the shadow of fear that this corporation cloaked me in. 

John LeBlanc entered the picture quite late for me and I only wish that I had come across him earlier.  His fee is miniscule compared to the relief that comes from having a man of his professional experience on your side who is quick to go to bat for you.  I really feel that he is one of those good people who understands the tricks of the less honourable and can play them and beat them at their own game.  He is also very good at helping to put many of the fears relating to this experience to rest.

I arrived back in my home and native land with my newly wife of new Canadian Citizenship with full intentions of settling this old debt. NCO Financial and the institutions that support and tolerate such establishments made me embarrassed to call this country home.  I had after all taken a loan to attend a Canadian School in an industry in which I would later work in and support the Canadian economy.  John LeBlanc as well as a few others helped me regain some dignity in the place I would like to continue to call home.  

I will be writing a thread on recommended advocates at a later time to explain John’s role in putting this debt to rest.

The "without prejudice" clause is really not a problem in such negotiations. It is standard in out of court settlements. It should always be used by any debtor proposing a deal. Basically the letter cannot be used against you unless you go to court and the judge imposes a settlement. Should that final settlement be similar to or less than the amount proposed in the "without prejudice" letter, it can then be produced to the judge and a penalty imposed against the person who turned it down. It cannot be used before the final verdict or if the final verdict was for a sum greater than that offered in the letter. The other reason for a debtor to use it in regular correspondence is that it cannot be used against you in court, it cannot be construed as an acknowledgment of the debt by the creditor in order to reset the statute of limitations.