Author: The TrueAccord Team

Pitfalls on the Path to Digital Debt Collection

By on August 25th, 2020 in Industry Insights, Machine Learning, Product and Technology, User Experience

Banks are accelerating their adoption of new digital debt collection tools in anticipation of a “tidal wave of consumer debt issues” when government stimulus programs end and financial institutions stop offering forbearance and loan deferral options.

That’s the premise of a new article in American Banker highlighting a variety of technology-powered strategies banks are using to make debt resolution more automated, conversational, and empathetic. These approaches range from the convenient (more flexible self-service payment options) to the high-tech (robotic process automation). 

The American Banker article highlights promising signs of progress, particularly for industry players that have not always been known for digital adoption. KeyBank, for example, is in the process of rolling out a self-service digital payment portal designed to offer banking customers privacy and flexibility in resolving payments. And Alabama-based Regions is implementing digital messaging and intelligent interactive voice response (IVR).

At the same time, the article shines a light on the massive challenges facing any financial institution looking to implement intelligent digital debt collection at scale. Here are three common hurdles on the path to digital debt collection maturity – and why they matter:

Challenge #1: “One-size-fits-all” approaches

The challenge: In its overview of Regions, the article makes reference to a single conciliatory messaging tone used in all outreach to delinquent customers. 

Why it matters: Consumers differ vastly in their preferences and responsiveness to digital touchpoints. For example, one consumer might respond to a friendly message delivered by SMS, while another might respond best to a straightforward message delivered by email. As a result, a one-size fits all approach falls short of realizing the potential – in both performance uplift and customer experience – of true one-to-one personalization.  

The TrueAccord approach: HeartBeat, TrueAccord’s patented machine learning platform, mines through tens of millions of data points to optimize digital outreach on the individual level within a programmed set of compliance rules  – and continues learning the more data it analyzes.  

Challenge #2: Narrow, channel-specific use of machine learning 

The challenge: Another challenge that banks face in scaling their use of intelligence – including artificial intelligence (AI) – is the limited deployment of algorithms and optimization within a single kind of channel, such as in a call center environment. The article profiles a collections and business process outsourcing company, for example, that developed an AI-based virtual assistant that can handle most inbound phone calls.

Why it matters: Machine learning and artificial intelligence (AI) are powerful tools for restoring intimacy and relevance to customer relationships at scale. At their most useful, these tools should be deployed to personalize the customer’s full experience with a bank – not just the limited interaction on one channel. 

TrueAccord’s Approach: HeartBeat captures a continuous data feedback loop and optimizes for each customer touchpoint across a variety of digital channels, ensuring that each customer is being reached on the channel that is most relevant for her.  

Challenge #3: Building a truly comprehensive and flexible self-serve portal

The challenge: Constructing a digital portal that drives consumer adoption and usage takes major work. To truly match the convenience of online banking, digital tools must also allow consumers to adjust the length and installment amount on a payment plan, defer a payment, dispute all or a portion of their debt, apply for a hardship pause on their debt, and much more.

Why it matters: Research suggests that customers want to be able to self-serve. But doing so requires the full, flexible range of interaction options that would be available to them through traditional analog channels.

TrueAccord’s Approach: Through a robust and flexible digital platform, TrueAccord offers  a best-in-class self-serve experience: over 95% of users resolve their accounts without ever directly communicating with an agent. 

Ultimately, digital debt collection technologies offer banks the ability to build lasting relationships with their customers. As Kimberly Snipes, consumer chief information officer at KeyBank puts it in the American Banker article: “We want our customers to say, I hate that I had that situation, but I felt like my bank was working with me, not against me.”

Being aware of the challenges on the path to digital debt collection – and having a plan in place to address them proactively – can help financial institutions ensure that they’re set up for long-term success. 

About TrueAccord

TrueAccord is reinventing the relationship between creditors and lenders with a machine learning-driven, digital approach to debt collection. Our technology personalizes outreach to each customer across digital channels, continuously optimizing for performance while delivering a customer experience that builds long-term brand loyalty. Schedule a demo today to learn more. 

TrueAccord Welcomes Laura Marino, Chief Product Officer, and Charles Deutsch, General Manager of Financial Services

By on July 27th, 2020 in Company News
TrueAccord Blog

As the US is starting to understand the impact of COVID-19 and its aftermath on our economy, more consumers are expected to default and find themselves dealing with debt. Banks, lenders, and other financial players are accelerating their digital transformation roadmaps, shortening years’ worth of development into mere months, in an attempt to service consumers at scale while managing the complexities of our new normal and the limitations of outdated infrastructure.

This push to digitize rewards market leaders, and as a result TrueAccord is growing, and every month we serve more consumers and more financial institutions than we ever did. Growth attracts clients, funding, and world-class talent, and the latter is what we’re excited to announce today.

Laura Marino joins TrueAccord as Chief Product Officer. We work with some of the most sophisticated financial institutions in the world, and they require outstanding innovation, speed to market, and high-quality execution. Consumers need delightful experiences and a helping hand on their way back to financial stability. Laura’s experience at Lever and other enterprise-facing technology companies will be instrumental in upleveling our product offering, meeting our clients needs, and articulating a roadmap that combines an understanding of regulations, robust architecture, and an ever-evolving, high-performing servicing capability that supports financial institutions and consumers alike.

Charles Deutsch joins us as General Manager of Financial Services. TrueAccord offers low-friction, easy-to-use repayment tools for consumers who are ready to tackle their debt repayment journey and improve their financial stability. Regardless, many consumers can’t pay their debts because of financial difficulties. Charles will draw on his vast experience in running fintech businesses to build tools to help consumers improve their financial situation, and as a result, their ability to repay debt.

Laura Marino and Charles Deutsch join a world-class team composed of company Founder and CEO of TrueAccord Group, Ohad Samet, Sheila Monroe as COO and CEO of TrueAccord Corp, Gene Linetsky as CTO, Noah Barr as CFO, and Nadav Samet as CIO and General Manager of True Life Solutions, which launched the game-changing consumer product, Engage.

Greene v. TrueAccord further refines email best practices

By on May 19th, 2020 in Compliance

The Northern District of California has confirmed what the law makes clear: a debt collector may send the initial communication by email (except in New York).

In Greene v. TrueAccord, Case No. 19-cv-06651 (N.D. Cal. May 19, 2020), the Plaintiff claimed the initial email she received and opened violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) and the Electronic Signatures in Global Commerce Act (E-SIGN) because she never consented to receive email from TrueAccord.

As the District Court made clear, consent is not a factor when an initial communication contains the validation notice in the body of the email. Only one week after final submissions on the motion to dismiss the Complaint, the District Court dismissed the case with prejudice also finding TrueAccord’s validation notice met the requirements of the law and TrueAccord’s emails sent during the 30-day validation period did not overshadow the initial demand.

The case

Sending the initial communication and validation notice by email

A debt collector must provide a consumer with a notice about how to dispute an account.  The law states the notice must be given either in the initial communication or in writing within 5 days of that first communication.  The FDCPA does not state what methods a collector can use to provide the validation notice in the initial communication—it only indicates that a “communication” is conveying information about a debt through any medium.  Many debt collectors have hesitated to use email and other modern forms of communications that consumers prefer because these modes are not addressed in the FDCPA.  

In this case, Plaintiff argued that TrueAccord violated the FDCPA by sending the validation notice in an initial communication by email without the consumer’s consent.  Plaintiff argued that TrueAccord did not follow the E-SIGN Act, which outlines the requirements for obtaining consent to email a consumer documents that must be provided in writing.  

However, as the Court recognized, the E-Sign Act applies to notices that must be provided in writing.  Under the FDCPA, the validation notice is not required to be provided in writing if it is given in the initial communication.  Since TrueAccord provided the validation notice in the body of the initial communication, E-SIGN does not apply.  The Court ruled TrueAccord properly delivered the validation notice in the body of the initial email.

“The Court also agreed with the CFPB’s proposal on the fact that the subject line should contain the name of the creditor and one additional piece of information about the debt other than the amount.”

The Court, in finding that an initial communication can be made electronically, pointed to the fact that “a communication” is broadly defined and can be sent across any medium. Additionally, the Court pointed out that despite amending the FDCPA in 2006 Congress has not made any effort to amend the statute to account for newer communication technologies that have developed.  The Court also recognized the CFPB’s proposed rulemaking permits a validation notice as part of an initial communication in the body of an email. 

The Court explained that when using email to send the initial communication the notice must be reasonably conveyed to the consumer. This requires the notice to appear in the body of the email—not in an attachment where it could be “hidden from the eyes” of the consumer. 

The Court also agreed with the CFPB’s proposal on the fact that the subject line should contain the name of the creditor and one additional piece of information about the debt other than the amount. This ensures “the consumer’s attention is focused on the email . . . as many . . . make decisions to read, ignore, or delete emails on the basis of the subject line.” 

While TrueAccord’s subject line did not contain this information (it read “This needs your attention”), the Plaintiff received the email and opened it.  While the Court noted that the subject line did not convey that the purpose of the email was to collect a debt, the Plaintiff still opened the email with the validation notice in the body.  Therefore, Plaintiff had no standing to make an argument that the subject misled her from opening and receiving the notice when she actually opened it. 

Use of the term “send” instead of “mailed”

Plaintiff also argued that the validation notice in the body of the email was incorrect and misleading because the statute reads “a copy of such verification . . . will be mailed to the consumer.” Yet, the notice in TrueAccord’s email used the word “send” instead of the word “mailed.” 

When evaluating whether or not a collection communication violates the FDCPA, Courts use the “least sophisticated consumer standard.”  This standard is designed to protect all consumers in the spirit of the FDCPA, not just the consumer who filed a lawsuit.  

In looking at the challenged language under this least sophisticated consumer standard, the Court held that there is no requirement for a validation notice to track the language of the statute verbatim.  The Court stated that: 

“…the fact that TrueAccord’s notice departed from the statutory language could not plausibly have deceived or misled the least sophisticated consumer reading the notice.” 

Instead, the consumer would understand from the use of the word “send” that a copy of the verification could be physically mailed or electronically mailed; as the Court noted, electronic mailing of validation documents is permitted in compliance with the E-SIGN Act.

Subsequent email communications did not overshadow the validation notice

Plaintiff also claimed that multiple demands for payment during the thirty-day validation period violated the FDCPA because these emails overshadowed the initial communication containing the validation notice.  The FDCPA protects consumers from collection efforts and communications sent during the thirty-day validation period that overshadow the consumer’s right to dispute.  Typically, communications that demand immediate payment or offer deadlines prior to the expiration of the thirty days constitute overshadowing.

In dismissing Plaintiff’s theory, the Court found that the FDCPA does not put any limits on the number of times a debt collector can communicate with a consumer during the validation period.  The Court noted that while it is possible that the number and timing of communications sent to a consumer could be relevant in an evaluation of whether the communications overshadow the notice, the number of communications in this case—seven within a 30day period—is not excessive. 

The Court also looked at the content of all these emails.  The emails clearly conveyed that TrueAccord would like a payment. They did not include:

  • Language requiring a payment
  • Language suggesting that a payment should be made prior to the expiration of the 30-day validation period

The Court noted there was no real expression of urgency and all emails had a prominent out of statute disclosure stating that, because of the age of the debt, the creditor will not sue Plaintiff or report it to a credit reporting agency.  By taking this “non-threatening content” of the communications in consideration with the number of emails sent, the Court did not find it plausible that the least sophisticated consumer could be misled or that the emails overshadowed the validation notice.

What lessons can we learn from this case?

Greene is only the second case ever to evaluate how to properly provide the validation notice by email.  It provides good guidance to follow:

  • Placing the notice in the body of the email, not behind a password or through a link with seven steps to download (like in LaVallee) and
  • Including the name of the creditor and one additional piece of information in the subject line. This step brings the consumer’s attention to the initial email as relating to the debt (this is also forthcoming in the CFPB rule).

Greene is also the first case ever to evaluate the content of email communications sent during the validation period.  It provides good guidance to follow regarding appropriate tone, frequency, and payment requests.  Of interest, the Court noted that TrueAccord included a “Dispute this Debt” link on all emails.  The Court felt that it’s smaller font size and placement at the footer of the emails “buried” the link; but ultimately that fact:

“…did not mean that the original validation notice ha[d] been overshadowed, particularly given the specific facts before the Court.”  

The text appeared in the footer of all emails, along with our mailing address, phone number, office hours, and Privacy Policy.  

Email is a core part of an omnichannel, digital collection strategy, but it doesn’t evolve overnight. It’s important that you have the experience and infrastructure in place to send and deliver emails on a mass scale so that they’re delivered to the consumer’s inbox. Cases like this are shaping the future of digital debt collection practices and how consumers interact with their debts. 

Want to learn more about how TrueAccord remains at the forefront of regulatory change? Reach out to our team!

How to Build Your Business’ Reputation Using Digital Collections

By on November 6th, 2019 in Industry Insights
five people putting their hands in for a deal

The age of the internet has brought about an age of transparency and exposure. News can travel around the globe in seconds thanks to the power of social media, and this visibility means that a company’s business practices, day to day operations, and mission are just as clear and present in the market as their products and services. Brand matters, and nothing helps to build or break a brand’s reputation faster than social proof. 

Today, companies don’t win just because they have the best products and services, they win when they provide the best customer experience and allow their customers to share that with the world. Companies that do this well are experience disruptors. Creditors looking for collections solutions can struggle to provide a positive collections experience (no customer wants to be in debt after all), but we know that it’s possible to build your brand and still collect on debts at the same time.

Stay ahead of compliance

This should go without saying, but collections teams that stay up-to-date and even ahead of federal and state compliance meet with fewer customer complaints and lawsuits. In an industry where not using (or even over-using) the right language can lead to a lawsuit, ensuring compliance must be the first step in providing a consistent, secure, and positive brand experience. 

Creditors and customers alike benefit from collections systems that keep compliance at the forefront. New regulations like the CFPB’s proposed rules can add new layers of complexity to the collections process. Thankfully, digital collections strategies can aid in coding compliance directly into outreach and minimizing human error!

Be transparent

Speaking of using the right language at the right time, using clearcut language that helps consumers understand their debt is essential to building a brand that is seen as reliable and trustworthy.

Building your brand with a modern, digital collections strategy is essential because today it isn’t just about reaching consumers and requesting payment.

While compliant language is a large part of transparency, making it easy for customers to understand the exact steps they have to take to get out of debt and how they can work with a team to pay off that debt helps smooth the process. When steps to get back on track are clearly outlined and presented in a way that is digestible to the least sophisticated consumer, the debt payment experience is better for everyone.

Adapt to changing customer expectations

Customers expect their financial services to be exactly that—services; they want their tools to work for them. If someone can do all of their day-to-day banking through an app, they shouldn’t have to wade through stacks of paper mail and phone calls in order to resolve a debt.

Traditional collections models have made some technological advancements, but are still largely bound to call-based collections practices. Financial technology experience disruptors like Rocket Mortgage have simplified and digitized their services to meet consumer expectations. NerdWallet says that their “document and asset retrieval capabilities alone can save you a bunch of time and hassle.”

Make a change

Digital debt collection agencies are dedicated to saving consumers time and hassle by reaching them via email and push notifications instead of calling in the middle of dinner. Customers can respond to outreach and utilize payment systems at their own pace. 

Building your brand with a modern, digital collections strategy is essential because today it isn’t just about reaching consumers and requesting payment. Companies build reputation by providing a proper experience. How they collect is why they win. 

TrueAccord is redefining the collections experience for creditors and customers alike. Click here if you’re interested in learning more!

How to Ensure Your Safe Harbor Language is Actually Safe

By on October 24th, 2019 in Compliance

It has been nineteen years since the Seventh Circuit held that a debt collector must include a notice to consumers if the balance in a collection communication would change from day to day due to interest, fees, or other changes accruing on a debt.

However, we still see balance-related issues today under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act as some debt collectors struggle to provide consumers with the amount of debt owed in a simple, clear manner.  

Since Miller, other courts agree that a consumer must be told if the balance will increase adopting Miller’s safe harbor language. In September 2019, a court in the Eastern District of New York dismissed a case, finding the collection letter adequately set forth the amount owed because the letter included the safe harbor language.

“Additionally, debt collectors should not put the safe harbor language on an account where the balance will not increase.”

In Paracha v. MRS BPO, the fact that the balance on a second letter (mailed six months after the first letter) increased by thousands of dollars did not make the original letter deceptive or inaccurate. This decision was made because the first letter advised the consumer, through the safe harbor language, that the balance may increase over time.

Using (and not using) the right language

Debt collectors must be careful with the safe harbor language and cannot simply add it to a communication when a balance on a collection letter will increase. The safe harbor language must be accurate for the particular account in question. The safe harbor language will only be safe to the extent that it states what may cause the balance to change. 

For example, according to Boucher v. Finance System of Green Bay, Inc., if the debt will increase due to interest—not due to fees or other charges—then the safe harbor language should only advise that the balance may increase from day to day due to interest and not mention fees or other charges. 

Additionally, debt collectors should not put the safe harbor language on an account where the balance will not increase. Doing so could create a false sense of urgency, and a consumer may think that they need to pay the balance immediately or it will increase when in fact it will not increase. Debt collectors are not required to tell a consumer that a balance will not increase. 

Courts have made clear that a debt collector has no obligation to state that the balance will not increase when the balance on a collection communication is static. But, even when a debt is static, a debt collection agency must choose their words carefully when describing the amount of the debt owed.

In Koehn v. Delta Outsource Group, Inc., a consumer sued a debt collector, arguing that the words “current balance” materially mislead and confused the consumer into thinking that the balance would change from day to day. The Seventh Circuit found that the phrase was “common and innocuous” and not a violation of the FDCPA.

Itemizing debt

Debt collectors should be wary of itemizing a debt when the debt collector does not have the right to add interest and fees. The CFPB’s proposed rulemaking does include debt itemization; however, until the rule becomes final, cases like Virden v. Client Services, Inc., suggest that listing “zero dollars” for interest and fees could mislead a consumer into thinking that interest or fees may increase. This deception would, in fact, be in violation of the FDCPA. In Virden the agency included the following itemization:

Balance Due at Charge-Off$1,658.91
Interest$0.00
Other Charges: $0.00
Payments Made:$0.00
Current Balance:$1,658.91

The court found that the least sophisticated consumer could misinterpret the “$0.00” listed for interest and other charges and that one plausible misinterpretation could be that interest and other changes would begin to accrue if the debt was not paid. Since interest and other charges would not accrue on this debt, the court ruled that the information was deceptive.

Agencies need to be careful in choosing what words they use describing the balance owed on a debt. In this context, less is more. Do not add itemizations when not required and only use safe harbor language tailored specifically to the account. 

For more discussion of current balance issues, listen to the most recent episode of Two DEBTicated Attorneys.

Tracking Performance Data With Digital Debt Collection

By on October 21st, 2019 in Product and Technology

Call centers are notorious for reaching hundreds, if not thousands, of consumers several times per week (and even several times per day!). The debt collection industry is plagued by the perception that collectors are relentless and uncaring, which makes resolving debts even more challenging. Digital debt collection strategies aim to alleviate the stress of incessant calling for consumers, and also provide unique, powerful solutions for creditors.

Collection metrics

Digital-first debt collection strategies provide creditors the ability to track and aggregate more objective performance metrics that help strengthen their collections strategy. Qualitative metrics from traditional call centers are still subject to the endlessly variable human element of a phone call. 

When outreach is entirely automated, it becomes easy to A/B test simple changes (new subject lines, different greetings, etc.) and determine which are the most effective. But how do we define effectiveness? At the end of the process, an effective collections strategy is one that leads customers to make a payment. 

There are a few key metrics that call centers use to drive customers to this end goal that can be easily supplemented or overtaken by digital collection strategies.

Calls per account and calls per agent

Traditional collection agencies, like any other sales call center system, track the total amount of calls made to each customer and by each agent on the team. When individual agents are responsible for contacting customers, they have to hit an outreach quota. This quota reflects directly back on the calls per account, or how many times an individual customer has been contacted. 

As agents are required to call customers and collect on accounts, the calls per account may increase to a point where customers feel overwhelmed and over-contacted (which can even lead to symptoms of anxiety and depression). At the same time, if countless calls are being made, and an account is not paying, there is a clear gap in effectiveness. 

One of the advantages of a digital debt collection strategy is that agencies can reach customers with relevant messaging at times that work for them. This can include hours in which call centers are no longer legally allowed to reach a customer—before 8am or after 9pm. With these legal limitations in place and the need for agents to meet quotes, traditional collections strategies encourage an artificial inflation of outreach numbers that may not be positive.

Hit rates, percentage of outbound calls resulting in promise to pay (PTP), and call quality 

Call volume is not the end-all-be-all of call center metrics though. Simply tracking output numbers isn’t enough when engagement is the key metric. Hit rate is defined as the total number of calls divided by number of those calls that are answered by customers. While this number can be helpful in narrowing which calls were more successful than others, it cannot reach the same level of detail as a full digital strategy.

In the case of a phone call, there are limited options once the phone has been dialed:

  • The customer does not answer
  • The customer answers but ends the call before promising payment
  • The customer promises to pay

Trying to understand what leads to a successful payment on a call is then dependent on the agent’s perspective. Digital debt collection conducted through machine learning is able to communicate using personalized and consistent content. Hit rate, PTP, and call quality analysis can then be expanded on, and performance can be measured by:

  • Email Deliverability
  • Email open rates
  • Link click rates
  • Website engagement (Including clicking on further links, filling out forms, viewing specific webpages, and more)
  • Online payments

These data points can help pinpoint where in the process a customer was lost, improve the next attempt at outreach with that data in mind, and eventually guide the account to a payment. With more data and longer periods of time, machine learning processes only continue to improve.

Updating your collections strategy 

TrueAccord takes our digital strategy a step further by looking beyond simply using digital channels and focuses on the power of machine learning to continuously improve our collections performance. We’ve come to understand that creating an effective, empathetic collections experience actually comes from creating a more analytical and AI-driven process.

With better visibility into performance, more granular data points, and more accurate reporting available than ever before, digital debt collection strategies strengthen the power of any collections team.

What are accounts uncollectible?

By on October 3rd, 2019 in Industry Insights
Hands holding hundred dollar bills

Debt collection agencies work to recover money on behalf of creditors. Unfortunately, not every debt is collectible, and it’s important to recognize these edge cases before they become bigger problems.

What are accounts uncollectible?

Accounts uncollectible, also known as uncollectible debts, are accounts owed that have almost no chance of being paid off. While it is better for the customer’s credit score and overall financial health, as well as for the lending company’s growth to receive these payments, there are some debts that will simply never be paid. There are several reasons that this may be the case:

  • A customer is not reachable
  • A customer is unable to pay
  • A customer declares bankruptcy
  • A customer disputes the debt

While some debts may reach a point where they become uncollectible, there is a lot that can be done before those delinquent accounts reach the point of no return. Debt collection agencies serve to lessen the impact of accounts that become uncollectible and work to prevent them from becoming bad debts. 

The longer a company waits to adopt a collections solution, the more accounts they risk becoming uncollectible. We’ve already looked at some reasons why a debt may be hard to collect, but if a customer owes a debt, they have to pay it, right? Unfortunately, companies that make this assumption end up with debts on a timer.

A debt may reach its statute of limitations for collection.

Each state has distinct requirements that affect how long companies and collection agencies can legally collect on a debt. While a select few states have statutes that extend the collection window to up to 15 years, most are limited to somewhere between 3 and 6 years.

Once a debt ages out of these windows, it is considered a “time-barred debt.” Collecting a time-barred debt is possible, but the approaches are limited and creditors can no longer sue to demand collection.

Even if the debt is new enough to be collected, TrueAccord’s customer data indicates that new accounts (those in collections for fewer than 90 days) are four times more likely to begin a payment plan than those who’ve been in collections for more than six months. 

Those same new accounts are also eight times more likely to begin paying off a debt than those who have been in debt for longer than two years. This rapid decline means that creditors need to act quickly to prevent an account from slipping away.

How do you avoid accounts uncollectible?

If a customer has not paid a debt for one reason or another then companies are working against the clock to collect. The typical solution to recouping otherwise uncollectible debts is to hire a third-party debt collection agency. Many agencies operate by reaching out to customers and requesting (or demanding) payment for a debt, hoping to instill a sense of urgency in the customer.

One of the issues with this approach is that customers are forced to engage on the collector’s time rather than on their own. TrueAccord recognizes that when customers work on their own time, they are given power over their financial freedom and are more likely to commit to a payment plan. 

Another key issue with the traditional collections model is a lack of proper analytics. While call centers may reach hundreds of customers daily, each call can vary wildly due to the personal nature of a phone call. Digital-first collections strategies allow agencies to regularly send consistent messages and accurately test which of those messages prompt the most engagement and, ultimately, lead to payments. 

Any amount of uncollectible debt directly translates to a loss for creditors. The best option available to companies that wish to avoid losing out on delinquent accounts entirely is to embrace a digital-driven debt collection strategy. Uncollectible accounts will only get more difficult to recover over time, and if teams wait too long those accounts will truly be untouchable. 

What do debt collection agencies do?

By on September 25th, 2019 in Industry Insights
Coins spilling out of jar

Whether you’re trying to collect on small accounts or massive debts, working with an agency can help to improve your business’ bottom line. There are different approaches to the collections process and understanding those differences, the role of agencies, and the industry as a whole can help you make the right decision for your business.

What is a debt collection agency?

A debt collection agency, or debt collector, is a company, team, or individual that works to recover money on delinquent accounts. While some large companies opt to dedicate internal teams to the collections process, smaller and mid-sized companies opt to work with 3rd party debt collection agencies.

How do debt collection agencies work?

Collections agencies function as a financial service for companies that seek to outsource their collection needs and provide consumers a point of contact for paying off their debts. Agencies can work with a variety of companies and collect one or several types of debt, including:

  • Credit card debt
  • Medical debt
  • Car loan debt
  • Home loan debt
  • Personal loan debt
  • Business debt
  • Student loan debt

Delinquent balances that would otherwise sit unpaid are compiled into a portfolio for the debt collection agency to manage. These debts are still owned by the crediting company, and the collection agency functions as a liaison between the creditor and consumer. This relationship does not come without a cost. 

Debt collection agencies are paid based on a percentage of the debts that they are able to collect. This traditional collections model often extends to individual collectors whose earnings are paid out on a commission structure. Traditional debt collection agencies and their agents, therefore, are incentivized to reach customers however they can.

It’s important to recognize when a debt (or portfolio of debts) may no longer be collectible and what you can do to engage customers before their accounts reach that point.

Debt often can be tied to feelings of anxiety, stress, and depression, and when these feelings are met with persistent contact, rather than understanding, they can worsen. It is for this reason that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is working to make changes to existing debt collection laws and better protect consumers from predatory practices.

Debt Buyers

While typical agencies work with creditors that own the debt, debt buyers will outright purchase hard-to-collect debts. A debt may be considered hard to collect if it is nearing its statute of limitations for collection, a particularly small debt, or if other agencies have been otherwise unsuccessful in collecting it. Accounts with similar features (amount owed, age of the debt, amount of communication) will be grouped together, sold, and managed as a single portfolio.

If, for example, thirty customers owed Creditor A $100, but their debts went unpaid and ignored for a long period of time, Creditor A may no longer feel it is worth the time or resources required to pursue them. A debt buyer would purchase these debts from the creditor, and assisting the creditor in recouping the loss and reinvest that capital. Creditor A would recover a small portion of money they were not able to recover, and the debt buyer would then be able to freely pursue the debts for their own profit.

It’s important to recognize when a debt (or portfolio of debts) may no longer be collectible and what you can do to engage customers before their accounts reach that point. Using customers’ preferred communication channels and engaging with customers empathetically can help them recognize collections for what it is: a financial service.

The future of debt collection agencies

Expanding laws and developing technologies are gradually reshaping the collections industry. While the market itself may not change substantially (there will always be creditors, customers, and collectors), the ways in which collection agencies conduct their business will change drastically. 

Updates to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s regulations, along with evolving digital debt collection tools are driving a new era of collections practices. TrueAccord is dedicated to seeing these changes made real with our customer-focused, digital first collections strategy. Selecting the proper strategy for your business can make an enormous impact, but a proper collections strategy takes time to build, so get planning!

TrueAccord Submits Debt Collection NPRM Comments

By on September 19th, 2019 in Company News, Compliance
man_signing_document

In an effort to further improve the debt collection experience for consumers, TrueAccord filed comments in response to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB) Notice of Proposed Debt Collection Rulemaking. Our experience using mostly email to communicate with consumers about their debts gives us the unique ability to provide detailed feedback to the CFPB on the parts of the Proposed Rule that impacts the use of email, data science, and machine learning in debt collection. 

We know that consumers in debt collection benefit from both email communications and machine learning technologies. Email communications allow consumers to access content at their convenience (including emails that contain legally required disclosures); new machine learning technologies provide additional information and payment options based on the consumer’s interactions to further personalize their collections experience.

What are we suggesting?

Make the transition into collections communication simpler

When emailing a consumer, either an initial communication—one containing the validation notice in the body—or any communication relating to the debt, a debt collector should be able to contact that consumer at the email address that the consumer provided to the creditor. 

The proposed rules do not currently provide this option without causing an undue burden on consumers. TrueAccord highlighted that unnecessary restrictions in the proposal greatly limit the ability to communicate with consumers via email. Consumers who have already provided their preference for electronic communications to their creditor(s) would be forced to take extra steps because they have fallen into collection. 

Define and properly evaluate email as a unique medium

Our customers regularly tell us that email is very different from phone calls and even paper mail. As such, email communications warrant different treatment under the FDCPA and should not be subject to the standard time, place, and manner restrictions that were designed for and apply to primarily oral communications.

TrueAccord asked the Bureau to take this opportunity to further modernize the FDCPA by distinguishing that certain provisions do not apply to email. 

Recognize other, optional forms of electronic communications as legitimate

We raise concerns over the proposed definition of “attempted communication” and “limited content message.” The current proposed definitions have the unintended consequence of limiting digital advertising and other electronic messages that consumers can opt-in to receive. 

What is our goal?

TrueAccord’s suggested changes will increase the proposed rule’s ability to make collections more efficient, provide actual notice to consumers, give consumers immediate access to information, and enable consumers to control how they want to communicate.

The debt collection proposed rulemaking is an opportunity to empower the vast majority of consumers who prefer to communicate electronically. The Bureau must take advantage of this opportunity.

You can read TrueAccord’s full comments here.

Lavallee v. Med-1 Solutions Confirms Common Sense Email Principles

By on August 26th, 2019 in Compliance, Industry Insights

On August 8, 2019, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals (7th Cir.) released its long-awaited verdict in the case of Lavallee v. Med-1 Solutions, LLC, 17-3244 (7th Cir. Aug. 8, 2019). The court ruled that Med-1 Solutions, LLC did not properly provide the validation notice as required by the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

Additionally, the court held that the first email Med-1 Solutions, LLC sent did not constitute a debt collection communication. Despite the unsuccessful method by which Med-1 attempted to email the initial communication, it is possible to do so in a compliant manner consistent with the current interpretation of the FDCPA.

The court’s decision

The Court held that Med-1 Solutions, LLC did not properly deliver the validation notice to the consumer. Med-1 sent the Plaintiff an email, but the email did not contain the text of the validation notice.

Instead, the email contained a hyperlink to a page where the Plaintiff would have had to enter personal information, and then take four additional steps in order to open a PDF containing the full initial demand letter with the required validation notice language. 

The Court reasoned that Med-1’s email did not constitute a communication because the email did not have any content relating to a debt. The Seventh Circuit reasoned that the “email conveyed three pieces of information:

  • The sender’s name (Med-1 Solutions, LLC)
  • Its email address
  • The fact that it ‘has sent … a secure message.’ ”

The email did not convey any information about the debt so it did not constitute a communication.

The FDCPA requires debt collectors to provide the validation notice in the initial communication or within 5 days of the initial communication in writing. Since the email did not constitute an initial communication, the Court found the initial communication happened over the phone. Med-1 Solutions, LLC, however, did not provide the validation notice during that call or in writing within 5 days because the company believed that their email satisfied the requirement. 

How to provide a validation notice in initial communication via email

When sending an initial communication by email, the content in the body of that email must contain all the validation notice requirements (15 USC § 1692g). It should:

  • Identify current creditor
  • State the amount owed
  • Provide the validation statement explaining the customer’s dispute rights

With the right information provided in the initial communication customer’s are more likely to recognize the account and trust that the email is from a legitimate debt collector. It should contain information on:

  • How to unsubscribe from future emails
  • Telephone contact information
  • The business’ hours of operation

Beyond that, it should comply with any other state, federal, or local obligations such as whether or not to provide a disclosure or other information. These are some of the principals embraced in the CFPB’s proposed debt collection rule. Had Med-1’s email contained this information in the body of the email, the result in the case would have been different.

Limited content emails 

The Seventh Circuit’s decision also highlights a concern with sending limited content communications via email. This case reinforces the importance of developing an email strategy and fully understanding deliverability requirements. This can ensure emails are delivered and not identified as spam and filtered away from a recipient’s view.

A full deliverability strategy may consider several factors including, but not limited to ISP reputation, providing relevant content in the body of the email, and more technical aspects of email such as throttling, bounces, and bulking. These elements can greatly affect an email’s ability to reach its intended recipient and ultimately convey its message.

Med-1 Solutions, LLC did not have a prior relationship with the Plaintiff, they did not remember receiving the email, and they did not click on the hyperlink provided in the email. As the lower court noted in its decision, the Department of Homeland Security warns consumers from clicking on links received in emails from unknown senders. The Seventh Circuit decision showcases the ineffectiveness of using a limited content message to reach and engage a consumer.

TrueAccord and the future of digital debt collection

We work to create a digital environment that places customer experience at the forefront of our collections strategy. This means ensuring not only personalized content delivered through our machine learning technology, flexible payment options, and digital access for customers to manage their debts. We do all of this via software that guarantees compliance.

If you want to learn more about how our technology can change your strategy, reach out to our team here!