Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 29
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    16,474

    Default Re: Problems with Fiserv

    Quote Quoting Zosimus
    View Post
    Okay, perhaps I haven't provided enough context.

    In 2002, I purchased a vehicle from a dealer, and that dealer financed me through Premier America Credit Union in Chatsworth, CA. Subsequently, I began to bank there and began using their bill pay system, which was provided by Fiserv. In 2003, I totaled the car and ended upside down on the loan. I also lost two lawsuits related to real estate. I can only say this: Don't rely on the insurance provided by your HOA. Always have your own insurance policy because, at the very least, it will hire an attorney for you.

    So, in late 2003, I filed chapter 7 bankruptcy. Premier America hired an attorney to dispute the bankruptcy and recover some amount because I had used the credit card within the past 30 days of filing bankruptcy. The company figured I would be easy prey because I hadn't used an attorney to do the chapter 7 filing. But, I filed a motion to dismiss, and Premier America found itself paying for an attorney and losing most of the gains they hoped to make. So, we settled the amount in November.

    But, the whole time, Premier America was hounding me for payments on the discharged car loan. Every time I used the ATM machine, it would ask me to make a payment. Every time I spoke to a teller, he/she asked for a payment. Every time I used the website, it would ask me to make a payment. Finally, Premier America's system took a payment out of my checking account for the discharged car loan. I sued and won. In January 2004, I received the payment from Premier America, closed my account, and left the US for Peru on January 31, 2004. I am a Peruvian citizen.

    According to Fiserv, about a month after I left the USA, Fiserv processed a payment in the amount of $135.77 through this credit union to pay Pacific Bell. I did not have any business relationship with Pacific Bell. Prior to leaving for Peru, I was living with my mother. The only debt I had was with AT&T Wireless. Anyway, $135.77 seems like a lot for a one-month phone bill.

    In June 2017, I returned to the US and began living in Utah. I established accounts with UCCU and Wells Fargo. I use their bill payment without problem. But, a new bank (Bank of the West) offered me $250 to open an account with them and put my direct deposit there, so I did.

    But, the Bill Pay system doesn't work for me. So, they gave me the number for Fiserv. My SS# is blacklisted and Fiserv wants me to pay for an amount that they allegedly paid on my behalf to a company I didn't do business with through a closed credit union account some 15 years ago.

    So, what's the venue? As far as I know, I never signed anything with Fiserv, but maybe I did when I opened the Premier America Credit Union account. If so, these documents normally say that a specific state (such as Delaware) has jurisdiction. Alternatively, it could be argued that California law has jurisdiction. I really don't see how Utah figures into the matter. The federal FDCPA says that I can be sued in the county where the contract was initially signed, and that's Los Angeles county.

    Of course, Fiserv doesn't plan to sue me. It just has me blacklisted. In all likelihood, the company has nothing except for a computer entry to demonstrate that I owe money. Of course, I could simply limp along with Bank of the West for a few months, get my $250, close the account, and go back to using UCCU as primary. Or, I could try to dispute the debt.

    Utah law provides no help, but California law is far more consumer friendly. I am especially interested in the new AB 1526, which has modified the Rosenthal FDCPA to cover time-barred debts, such as the one in question.

    I was hoping to find someone here who knew about that.
    I would go back to UCCU and Wells Fargo. Cancel the Account with Bank of the West since you are unable to use their bill paying service. Tell them why. Tell them that Fiserv wants you to pay a bill that is not yours before you can use the bill paying service.

    I am having a similar problem with a cell phone provider. I ordered a home phone installed a few years ago, and the installation never happen and I never received a bill. I assumed that they had a glitch in their system, and since I had since discovered I didn't need the home phone after all, I didn't worry about it. Fast forward a few years and I attempt to add a cell phone to my account for my granddaughter. The cell phone provider refused to do so, even though I had a good record with them, because of a black mark about a home phone account that I never paid. When I explain what happened they got on the phone with the land line people and they would not budge because too much time had passed.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    5

    Default Re: Problems with Fiserv

    Quote Quoting llworking
    View Post
    I would go back to UCCU and Wells Fargo. Cancel the Account with Bank of the West since you are unable to use their bill paying service. Tell them why. Tell them that Fiserv wants you to pay a bill that is not yours before you can use the bill paying service.

    I am having a similar problem with a cell phone provider. I ordered a home phone installed a few years ago, and the installation never happen and I never received a bill. I assumed that they had a glitch in their system, and since I had since discovered I didn't need the home phone after all, I didn't worry about it. Fast forward a few years and I attempt to add a cell phone to my account for my granddaughter. The cell phone provider refused to do so, even though I had a good record with them, because of a black mark about a home phone account that I never paid. When I explain what happened they got on the phone with the land line people and they would not budge because too much time had passed.
    I think that your plan may be a good idea. I am thinking of taking the following three actions:

    1. To offer to settle the debt for $1.
    2. To inform Bank of the West (after getting the $250 they offered for me to switch to them) that I really cannot continue with their service because Fiserv is dunning me for a debt that was allegedly incurred some 15 years back. The hope would be to get the bank to pressure Fiserv into a more realistic posture.
    3. To contact Fiserv in writing about the debt to get Fiserv to respond in writing and then attempt to invoke the Rosenthal FDCPA.

    Of course, it may be difficult to argue that I am a "California consumer" as the meaning of this phrase is unclear and might not include Californians who have relocated to other states.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    8,238

    Default Re: Problems with Fiserv

    Quote Quoting pg1067
    View Post
    Assembly Bill 1526 was a bill that amended section 1788.14 of the California Civil Code and section 337 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Those amendments became effective on January 1, 2019.

    As I mentioned previously, the Rosenthal Act has nothing to do with your situation because no one is attempting to collect a debt, and the statute of limitations is irrelevant because no one is suing you. The company who apparently handles your new bank's bill pay service is refusing to do business with you. It is completely entitled to do that.
    And, of course, since the OP lives in Utah, California law on debt collection would not be relevant to him/her in any event.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    2,745

    Default Re: Problems with Fiserv

    Quote Quoting Taxing Matters
    View Post
    And, of course, since the OP lives in Utah, California law on debt collection would not be relevant to him/her in any event.
    Except that:

    If, as appears to be the case, the debt arose out of transactions between the OP and the creditor in California when the OP lived in California, he/she could be properly sued in California, and the court almost certainly would apply California law. If the defendants are in California, then they must abide by California law even if the OP lives elsewhere (i.e., if the Rosenthal Act were relevant and the creditor were located in California, the OP could choose to sue the creditor in California for violating California law).

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    8,238

    Default Re: Problems with Fiserv

    Quote Quoting pg1067
    View Post
    Except that:
    (i.e., if the Rosenthal Act were relevant and the creditor were located in California, the OP could choose to sue the creditor in California for violating California law).
    You are telling me that a debt collector in California must follow California law on collection even though the creditor is not located in that state simply because the debtor might sue the collector in California? The California courts would not choose to apply the foreign state's law in that case? If so, that would make California unusual indeed. (Not that being unusual would be new for the People's Republic of California. ) Debt collection laws are generally based on the location of the debtor, not the creditor. The reason courts do that is (1) to give deference to the policy of the state where the debtor is located, since debt collection laws are meant to protect the debtors of that state and (2) to avoid the debt collection companies simply all locating to the state with the most creditor favorable laws.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    2,745

    Default Re: Problems with Fiserv

    Quote Quoting Taxing Matters
    View Post
    You are telling me that a debt collector in California must follow California law on collection even though the creditor is not located in that state simply because the debtor might sue the collector in California?
    Since the California collector could be sued in California for violating the California law, absolutely. Could the collector choose not to follow the law because a non-California debtor might be unlikely to sue in California? Sure? Might the collector get away with it? Sure. But it's a risk.


    Quote Quoting Taxing Matters
    View Post
    The California courts would not choose to apply the foreign state's law in that case?
    California courts will apply California law to all issues unless one of the parties argues for the application of another state's law to a particular issue and convinces the court that other state's laws should govern the issue. Under the circumstances, I think it highly unlikely that any California judge would choose to apply another state's laws. And, frankly, I'd be very surprised if any other state's courts would do anything different. Of course, if the question is whether a Utah court would apply California law if the Utah debtor sued the California creditor in Utah, that's a very different thing.


    Quote Quoting Taxing Matters
    View Post
    Debt collection laws are generally based on the location of the debtor, not the creditor. The reason courts do that is (1) to give deference to the policy of the state where the debtor is located, since debt collection laws are meant to protect the debtors of that state and (2) to avoid the debt collection companies simply all locating to the state with the most creditor favorable laws.
    I don't disagree with any of this. However, if California law is more favorable to the consumer/debtor, that's even more reason why a California court would apply California law.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    8,238

    Default Re: Problems with Fiserv

    Quote Quoting pg1067
    View Post
    I don't disagree with any of this. However, if California law is more favorable to the consumer/debtor, that's even more reason why a California court would apply California law.
    I disagree. California has no interest in protecting the citizens of other states. The purpose of its debt collection laws is to protect its own citizens. The fact that California may regard it as a better law does not give California the right to override the choices of other states in the laws that they apply to their citizens. I'm not saying that a California judge might not do that anyway — California courts do lots of things I disagree with — but I think it inappropriate.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    2,745

    Default Re: Problems with Fiserv

    Quote Quoting Taxing Matters
    View Post
    I disagree. California has no interest in protecting the citizens of other states. The purpose of its debt collection laws is to protect its own citizens. The fact that California may regard it as a better law does not give California the right to override the choices of other states in the laws that they apply to their citizens. I'm not saying that a California judge might not do that anyway — California courts do lots of things I disagree with — but I think it inappropriate.
    Disagree all you like, but what you or I think is right or proper isn't the slightest bit meaningful, and California courts certainly do have the right to apply California law in cases filed in California involving at least one California party.

    California courts may not have an interest in protecting other states' citizens, but it does have an interest in controlling businesses that are in California.

    I can guarantee that, if an out-of-state debtor sued an in-state collector for violating the Rosenthal Act, the California court would entertain the suit and apply California law. Thus, your assertion that, "since the OP lives in Utah, California law on debt collection would not be relevant to him/her in any event" doesn't withstand scrutiny. It could very well be relevant depending on who sues whom and in what state.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    8,238

    Default Re: Problems with Fiserv

    Quote Quoting pg1067
    View Post
    I can guarantee that, if an out-of-state debtor sued an in-state collector for violating the Rosenthal Act, the California court would entertain the suit and apply California law.
    As written, I agree with that. But can you guarantee me that the California court in applying its choice of law rules, would not choose to apply Utah debt collection law and would definitely apply California debt collection law instead?

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    401

    Default Re: Problems with Fiserv

    Quote Quoting Zosimus
    View Post
    ...a new bank (Bank of the West) offered me $250 to open an account with them and put my direct deposit there, so I did.

    But, the Bill Pay system doesn't work for me.
    Is it a condition of getting the $250 that you have to use the bank's bill pay system? If not, can't you pay your bills using that account by doing a pull from the creditor instead of a push from your bank via their bill pay system, at least until you get the $250 credit added to your account?

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Warranties: What Happens if You Buy a Used Car that Has a Lot of Problems
    By lawfacts in forum Cars and Dealerships
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-12-2017, 02:13 PM
  2. Easement Use and Enforcement: Right of Way Problems
    By Angry Landowner in forum Real Estate Ownership and Title
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-02-2012, 12:41 PM
  3. Tax Problems with Ex
    By jamesw71 in forum Child Custody, Support and Visitation
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-18-2009, 07:48 AM
  4. Emancipation: Problems With Mom
    By snowbunni330 in forum Juvenile Law
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-09-2007, 04:27 PM
 
 
Sponsored Links

Legal Help, Information and Resources