National Arbitration Forum Decides 61 Year Identity Theft Victim Owes $46,000

Yahoo! Finance has a horrible story about a 61 year old lady living on $759 a month Social Security whose credit card was stolen and it ended up with the National Arbitration Forum (NAF) deciding she owed them $46,000.

When she received notice of pending arbitration against her, it had no claim attached to it. She didn’t even know who was suing her. She sent a letter asking for the case to be dismissed or to be served with an actual claim. She didn’t hear from them again until NAF told her they had ruled against her for $46,000. They didn’t even respond to her motion.

Takeaway: Scan your monthly credit card statements for any charges you don’t remember making and report them as soon as possible. Also, arbitration by companies against consumers is evil. Support the Arbitration Fairness Act.

Stacking the Deck Against Consumers [Yahoo! Finance]

Comments

Edit Your Comment

  1. pinkbunnyslippers says:

    I’m sorry but the woman’s age has no bearing on this article. If it’s meant to invoke sympathy, it doesn’t do much for me.

    Check your damn statements. And if you can’t (or won’t), then it sucks to be you when $46k of debt gets racked up to your name.

  2. Xkeeper says:

    Oh boy, I can’t wait to see the “blame the victim” gang this morning. “She should’ve known better!”

    This is just as bad — if not worse — as the couple that bought the home that was falling apart at the seams. It just shows that forced arbitration sucks and really, really needs to be be outlawed.

    IANAL, but couldn’t she technically still take them to court? I seem to recalll some bit of legislation stating that you couldn’t sign away your right to a trial in a contract…

  3. Xkeeper says:

    I see the hate groups are up and at ‘em early this morning. Sigh.

  4. Anonymous says:

    arbitration is the biggest bunch of sh*t. i wonder how many companies would be out of business due to boycotts if consumers were able to read about the court cases in thier newspapers.

  5. Anonymous says:

    i thought our legal system was suposed to protect us from predators trying to protect themselves from the said system. apparently not.

    thats makes corporations seem more like mobs and mafia if you ask me. they shouldn’t be able to become above the law, and by having arbitration suggests they don’t trust the judgement by the system and seems obvious they are trying to hide, or get away with something.

  6. Buran says:

    @pinkbunnyslippers: So you’re blaming the victim when she legitimately asked to actually be told what was going on? Wow. So it’s her fault for actually following up and asking what was going on, even though they explicitly ignored her request for help?

    And it was even the very first post that blamed the victim.

    I would have no sympathy for you if you were slapped with a default judgment about which you were deliberately left in the dark, and then had the very valid complaint that you have every right to be told what you are accused of.

  7. Buran says:

    I think she needs to sue. In a real court. This seems fraudulent to me. If you are going to try to extort someone with baseless undefined demands, you need to be forced to answer.

    I’d say a judgment of $46,000 plus $200,000 in punitive damages seems about right.

  8. humphrmi says:

    OK let me see if I got this correct… her identity was stolen, and based on her stolen identity a company that the thief took money from sued her, and now NAF has ruled against her.

    Doesn’t sound very binding to me. She didn’t agree to arbitration by virtue of never having set up the account in the first place, the thief did.

    IANAL and all that, but she should talk to a lawyer, I bet she can ignore this “judgement” and wait for them to sue her in proper court. Maybe even counter sue. In any case, I don’t see a “judgement” from a panel who’s authority rests in her agreeing to them having in the first place being valid if that agreement was not made by her.

  9. Landru says:

    @pinkbunnyslippers: I can’t wait until you’re old.

  10. MyCokesBiggerThanYours says:

    @Xkeeper: I dont think its blame the victim. But this whole “old lady on limited income” appeal to emotion is a basic fallacy of logic.

    We want to be logical don’t we?

    It realy sucks that she was ruled against. Hopefully there is some kind of appeal process.

    Still, its kinda strange that she never noticed 46,000 of ectra charges on her bill. It makes one wonder if she is telling the truth.

  11. Buran says:

    @Xkeeper: You were one post too late. Sad, because you were only the second poster.

  12. TravisL says:

    “My credit is ruined. For someone who is innocent to be found guilty — that’s what hurts the most.”

    Can someone explain to me what benefit good credit would be to a $759-a-month widowed social security recipient with a roof over her head?

  13. bravo369 says:

    I wouldn’t care what arbitration has to say about it. If i didn’t spend $46,000 then I’m not paying it. As for blaming the victim, what if she never used the credit card in months. It could have been stolen without her ever knowing it. Maybe the theif created an online account and changed the address so she woman never received a bill. Either way I don’t see how arbitration can deny a person their day in court.

  14. starrion says:

    But she can’t sue. By using the card she agreed to arbitration, which prevents lawsuits.

    It’s a miracle. We’ve found something -worse- than lawyers.

  15. topgun says:

    I wish there were more to the post. My gut feeling is that the woman is getting the shaft. I would guess the Attorney General in her state may help. I can’t imagine she would have had a credit line that large. Surely there would have been collectors all over her.

  16. hypnotik_jello says:

    She should have just shown her receipt!

    LOLz

  17. Anonymous says:

    these a-holes would sing a different tune if the woman was their grandma.

  18. cac67 says:

    I’d say a judgment of $46,000 plus $200,000 in punitive damages seems about right.

    Doesn’t seem about right to me. Punitive damages is missing a couple of digits. $20,000,000 is more like it.

  19. Roundonbothends says:

    “A spokesperson for Bank of America, which owns MBNA, says, “We believe arbitration is an efficient and fair method of resolving disputes between our customers and the company.”

    … in our favor.

    For this sin of omission and attempt at deceit, burn, baby, burn.

  20. mopar_man says:

    @pinkbunnyslippers:

    Apparently you only read the title of this post and made your assumptions that way. Or you really are as smart as a pair of pink bunny slippers. I hope one day you’re in this lady’s situation.

  21. pinkbunnyslippers says:

    @Buran: Did you read the article? She ignored the collection notices, and there’s no mention in the article whatsoever that when her card was stolen, she reported it. If the article was rewritten to indicate these motions on her part, then I’d retract my statement and jump on your little “sue the shit out of everyone” bandwagon you’ve got going here. But as it stands now, the article leads me to believe she did nothing, and once collections started rolling in, she completely disregarded them and failed to go to the credit card to find out what was going on.

    Collection agencies don’t care about anything except getting debts owed. They don’t know “who signed for this? Where are the signatures?”. That’s not their job. That’s the job of the credit card, and the way it’s portrayed, she just ignored the fact that her card had been stolen.

    So yes, I wouldn’t expect you to have ANY sympathy for me if my credit was ruined and I just sat idly by, ignoring it, thinking it’d go away.

  22. FLConsumer says:

    The Consumerist article has it wrong. She’s not an identity theft victim. Her credit card (or credit card #) was stolen. The original article was unclear as to which method was used, but nonetheless, it sounds like it was a card SHE herself signed up for, thus would be obligated to the terms & conditions. I will make the minor jab of “why didn’t she see this on her statements?” The only thing which comes to mind is that it might have been an old account which she didn’t use frequently and maybe didn’t give them her forwarding address.

    I’m not against arbitrations, but I am when it comes to the way many companies are levying them against their customers. Arbitration was meant to be used between two companies who wished to keep their matters private, out of the courts, not company vs. customer. I’ve worked with several arbitrators in business disputes (all were members of the American Arbitration Association, the the National Arbitration group these companies seem to use) and the arbitrator proved to be more of a referee than anything else. One of them even posed the question privately to both sides, “in your opinion, what would be a fair resolution?” That said, I would want a real judge, who is bound to follow the law in a consumer vs. company dispute.

  23. IRSistherootofallevil says:

    She should report them for mail fraud. The credit card company AND the arbitration firm. Not to mention racketeering, antitrust violation, defamation of character, slander, libel, emotional distress, obstruction of justice, etc.

  24. IRSistherootofallevil says:

    Nowhere in the contract does it say that she can’t get law enforcement involved if she observes criminal conduct on either side….

    Last time I checked, mailing someone a bill for money that you’re not entitled to (or trying to collect money to which you are not entitled) constitutes mail fraud.

  25. Slytherin says:

    @pinkbunnyslippers: Seriously…are you always this bitchy?

  26. pinkbunnyslippers says:

    @mopar_man: I’d never wish something like this on anyone, but you seem to have no problem doing it to me. Grow up.

    I’m simply trying to play devil’s advocate here and say that if she never reported the card stolen (which the article eludes to), who’s to say she wasn’t the one who charged $46k and just never paid it? The credit card has no way of knowing that. Hence them going after the debt that is due to them.

    Arbitration sucks. I get it. I think if she had followed the proper protocol in reporting this card stolen, then she needs to sue the card company for even sending this to collections in the first place.

  27. pinkbunnyslippers says:

    @Slytherin: Yup – I’m always the bad guy. Heaven forbid I don’t take everything I read on the internet as gospel, and actually want to challenge something.

  28. bonnie says:

    @TravisL: Car insurance rates, for starters. Credit scores and used by many companies for many different things.

  29. crgriggs says:

    Wow, this is big. Do your part (as the linked article) suggests and contact both your Senator and Represenative and let them know you want them to support this Bill. I have already took my own advice so please take a few minutes and do your part.

  30. Anonymous says:

    Yeah, a sad story.
    Arbitration stinks. I get it.
    But when your credit card is stolen, you report it. All charges are then not your responsibility.
    When the creditors called her, she seemed surprised, then made unreasonable demands of them and stopped speaking to them because she though they were nuts.
    As much as I have sympathy for her, simply reporting the card stolen would have ended this before it started.
    I get pinkbunnyslippers point….
    What some of your morally outraged posters don’t seem willing to confront is that there were several times when she could have worked this out, but for some reason or another failed to.
    Calm down, stop wishing ill on people you disagree with – it makes you seem like a hypocrite.
    Let me get this straight – a little old lady you know literally nothing about has an arbitration ruling go against her and you are upset, but someone comes here to point out that she was likely somewhat negligent about it and you wish it upon him?
    Yeah. That makes as much sense as taking up smoking to prove that it doesn’t cause cancer.

  31. tadowguy says:

    My mom is 61 and she’s still rather competent and also still working. Just because your 61 doesn’t mean you sit in a corner drooling on yourself while you watch The Price is Right.

  32. SybilDisobedience says:

    Was I the only one confused by the wording of the headline? I thought the woman had been a victim of identity theft for 61 years.

  33. humphrmi says:

    In my previous post, I didn’t get that this was a card she signed up for. I read the article, but somehow the fact that it was her card still failed to sink in (maybe because of the “Identity Theft” moniker on the post…)

    Still, I wonder. Can CC companies garnish wages (or can Social Security even be garnished) or lien homes based on an arbitrator’s decision? I mean, you pretty much have to go to at least a local jurisiction’s court clerk in order to get those things (garnishments, liens), so does this judgment even do the CC company any good (or her any harm)? Yeah, OK, her credit’s screwed up, doesn’t sound like she really needs it anyway.

    Again, I think she should ask a lawyer about just ignoring the whole thing until they take her to a real court.

  34. Saboth says:

    @TravisL:

    Well since our society is basically started to revolve around your credit rating:
    Ability to get a job
    Ability to get a car
    Favorable rates on credit cards and loans
    Car insurance rates
    Who knows what is next? Health insurance rates I’d guess.

  35. savvy9999 says:

    MBNA can’t garnish her SSI wages, so she’ll be alright.

    Wait… she’s only 61, what is she doing retired already and on the dole? 61 ain’t old, it’s the new 40!

    And whatever happened to the $50 max liability for stolen or lost cards?

    Arbitration still obviously sucks, but there’s too many questions regarding this tale to call anyone out accurately.

  36. godawgs7 says:

    I am a lawyer in training (and this is in no way legal advice to anyone)…we covered arbitration earlier in the year in law school. Arbitration, when done properly is an extremely effective system. It allows huge companies to fight it out w/o revealing lots of potentially damaging info during discovery at a fraction of the cost of going to trial. It also takes a huge burden off our court system.
    Yes, i’ve read the study about how the AAA sides w/ their clients something like 95% of the time. That sucks. But arbitration does have it’s place in society.

    Now arbitration decisions are generally legally binding and are VERY VERY VERY difficult to have thrown out by a court. It requires fraud, deceit, or some other illicit issue for the court to actually take a look at it. She could have a case if she was never actually served w/ the claim against her.

    @IRSISTHEROOTOFALLEVIL-we haven’t covered the topics you discuss, but im going to give it a shot:
    *antitrust violation – how is this in any way antitrust?
    *defamation of character/slander/libel – everything said about her was true based on documents. on paper, she owes that money.
    *emotional distress – it is an insanely high burden to claim intentional infliction of emotional distress. Cases that meet that burden, off the top of my head, include insurance agencies denying claims to speed up someone’s death and a police officer showing the video of an autopsy at a party and the family of the dead boy finding out about it. A company saying, “it says you owe us $65,000. pay up.” isn’t IIED.
    *obstruction of justice – this is used for criminal proceedings, from what i understand, not civil.

  37. jmschn says:

    “I ignored them because I thought they were nuts.”
    -even if they are nuts, you don’t ignore the magnitude and seriousness of the event.
    “Lieber sent a letter demanding the agency cease contact — which debt collectors must do under a 1996 federal law. But they continued to harass her and her spouse”
    -debt collectors..persistent bastards!
    I’m not a big fan of the sob story part that the media spins but i suppose it does work to tear at the hearts of the sympathetic.

  38. humphrmi says:

    @godawgs7: It may be binding, but in this case pretty useless. She makes under a grand a month. Maybe she owns a house, but even with a lien she can live in it for the rest of her life without caring about a lien as long as she doesn’t try to refi or sell.

    This is why back in the old days companies just wrote off bad debts from “little old ladies from Pasadena” – regardless of who’s right and wrong, they are unlikely to recover anything from her ever.

  39. Anonymous says:

    “Yes, i’ve read the study about how the AAA sides w/ their clients something like 95% of the time. That sucks. But arbitration does have it’s place in society.”

    Huh?

  40. erratapage says:

    I won a claim in a AAA arbitration (as a homeowner in a dispute with my general contractor). I do think that arbitration can be a fabulous tool, especially given the cost of litigation these days. I think we have to be careful, though, since arbitration organizations can appear to be biased in favor of the big companies that routinely pay their bills.

    As for little old ladies who have to fight debts. My Mom’s credit card number was stolen shortly before her debt. She noticed problems on her credit card statements and disputed the charges and reported the card as stolen. Her new card number was then stolen and she repeated the process.

    When she died, it took me months to straighten out the mess.

    Moral of the story: it’s a pain in the butt when you do everything the way you are supposed to. Maybe they should make things a little easier on us consumers.

  41. Bye says:

    @Landru:
    Little Miss Bunny Slippers will be lucky to live long enough to be considered “old” with that petty, hateful little ‘tude of hers.

  42. pinkbunnyslippers says:

    @Rey: I’m not really sure how I’m “petty” and “hateful” because I didn’t immediately choose this woman’s side here. I said check your credit card statements, report your card stolen when it happens to you, and don’t just sit idly by expecting it to go away because you served the collections agency with a C&D order. If you’re referring to my initial statement of “it sucks to be you”, well I’m sorry if you took offense to that, and you interpreted that as me having an attitude, but check out the tagline of this site — “shoppers bite back”. Being a good consumer is seeing both sides of a story, so while I acknowledge you don’t agree with me, and completely respect that, there’s absolutely no reason to make this personal. None.

  43. Sam Glover says:

    Sadly, this should hardly be surprising, since at least one of NAF’s arbitrators is little more than a rubber stamp for the debt collection industry:

    [sjglover.com]

  44. Sam Glover says:

    Also, in response to Mr. Bunny Slippers, this “little old lady” did attempt to address the debt with the debt collector who was calling her:

    “I said I wanted to see the signatures — who had signed for these purchases? And they wouldn’t give me that,” says Lieber. “They said, ‘You’re responsible, this is your credit card.’ I ignored them because I thought they were nuts.”

    Debt collectors are not interested in identifying people whose credit cards or identities have been stolen. They are only interested in collecting money from consumers, regardless whether the consumers actually owe it.

  45. Sam Glover says:

    @godawgs7: Intentional infliction of emotional distress has nothing to do with the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, but “garden variety emotional distress,” or the emotional toll that debt collection takes on the victims of harassment, is recoverable in FDCPA lawsuits as a component of actual damages.

  46. PaulBland says:

    I am a consumer lawyer. We regularly get case intakes from people who tell stories remarkably like the one described in this story. The National Arbitration Forum, in our experience, routinely enters judgments (a) against persons who do not actually owe the debt, for reasons like the woman described in this piece; (b) on zombie debts that are WAY past the statute of limitations; and (c) that include all kinds of bogus additional fees and charges. The empirical evidence from their disclosures in California shows that they carefully steer the vast majority of cases to a small handful of arbitrators who regularly rule for the credit card companies. Their advertising has been targeted at banks for years, with the gist of it being that they will side with the banks and against consumers. Among other pieces of bad news, in many jurisdictions it is next to impossible to challenge even the most abusive NAF awards in court. Nonetheless, a rapidly growing number of courts in other parts of the country have been throwing out NAF awards. Hopefully some state attorney general or other regulator will step in before this kangaroo system gets too far out of control.

  47. Buran says:

    @pinkbunnyslippers: Oh, I read the article. And she did the right thing when she asked for a clarification of what she was being harassed over, and they ignored her. Do you blindly pay every bill submitted to you? It’s foolish to do that — how do you know you’re not being scammed? She did the right thing when she tried to find out what was going on.

    I would have ignored such a letter if my request for more information went ignored, too. If it’s not provable to be from legitimate authority, and requests for proof or further information go ignored, that’s a hallmark of a SCAM.

    But it’s still all somehow her fault for trying to be smart.

    So apparently you’re damned if you do and damned if you don’t.

  48. Buran says:

    @cac67: I thought the limit was about 5x actual damages? I took a guess, took some off since I’m not the kind to sue someone’s socks off, and went with that.

  49. bonzombiekitty says:

    I have to agree with pinkbunnyslippers. When a collections agency is telling you that you owe your credit card company $46,000 – you don’t just ignore them because you think they’re crazy (no matter how you arrived to that conclusion). You keep fighting them one way or another. Sue them for violating a request to stop contacting you, take it up with the credit card, etc. It may be a pain in the butt, but you don’t just outright ignore them. Somebody is convinced you owe them money. Ignoring the problem, especially for such a huge sum of money, is not going to fix the issue.

    It comes down to the fact that there would have been steps before it had gone to collections and arbitration. At each point in time, she had the opportunity to call the credit card company and dispute the charges. If she was checking her monthly statement, she would have noticed the charges and disputed them then. There were probably a couple statements or calls from the credit card company before it got booted over to collections. From the article it looks like she was talking with the collection agency and asking for clarification on the charges when she should have been talking to the credit card company. AFAIK, all the collection agency knows is that you owe $X to person/company Y.

    Yes, arbitration sucks in most cases when it’s a single consumer vs a big company. I won’t argue that. Nor will I argue against the fact that it sucks that this woman has to pay. But the fact of the matter is that she didn’t properly care for her own finances. This would have all been avoided had she paid attention to her credit card in the first place. Granted, one would expect a credit card company to notice that $46k is an odd amount and security measures should have kicked in, but ultimately the responsibility to look out for fraudulent charges comes down to the consumer.

  50. pinkbunnyslippers says:

    @Buran: I’m not saying she’s stupid for trying to clarify the debt with the collections agency. But when an agency says “Hey – you owe $46k on your MBNA Credit Card”, don’t you think you’d say “Hmm, maybe I should call the credit card and verify that.”? Apparently not – you just ignore them and think they’re crazy.

    You’re completely missing my point here. YOU DON’T IGNORE BILL COLLECTORS. You verify the debt. How hard is that?

  51. pinkbunnyslippers says:

    @Buran: And for the record, when I say “verify the debt”, I don’t mean with the collections agency. They could give two sh*ts about how you (or someone else) racked up debt. She should’ve gone DIRECTLY to the bank. That’s where the mistake lies.

  52. Buran says:

    @pinkbunnyslippers: How hard is it to READ THE ARTICLE AGAIN and see that she DID try to verify it and WAS IGNORED, and so she did not send them a damn thing, as you do when you CAN’T CONFIRM THE LEGITIMACY OF A DEMAND. Wow, you really are as dense as everyone else thinks you are. Who the hell else are you supposed to contact if not the ones who claim you owe money?!

  53. pinkbunnyslippers says:

    @Buran: I’ve read the article plenty. She asked THE COLLECTIONS AGENCY:

    “I said I wanted to see the signatures — who had signed for these purchases? And they wouldn’t give me that,” says Lieber. “They said, ‘You’re responsible, this is your credit card.’ I ignored them because I thought they were nuts.”

    You don’t ask the collections agency – you ask the bank! The way that article is written, it leads me to believe she never reported the card stolen, never talked to the bank to verify that they had indeed outsourced the collection of debt to this agency.

    The collections agency ignored her because THEY DON’T HAVE THE RECORDS. ONLY THE BANK DOES.

    I’m not an idiot. I’m not dense. I’m reading the article the way it’s written. Show me where in the article she says “I contacted MBNA and they ignored me.”

  54. bonzombiekitty says:

    Just to back up pinkbunnyslippers again on this one. The way the article reads to me – she asked the collection company for the information, not the credit card company. The collection company wouldn’t have the information she would want, hence the “It’s your card, that’s your responsibility” comment – it’s not the responsibility of the collection agency to get that information, and considering that the only way to be able to see who signed for stuff on your credit card is to explicitly ask the company for that information, the comment would not make sense if it had come from someone that was representing the credit card.

  55. pinkbunnyslippers says:

    @bonzombiekitty: Thanks for the backup! I’m sorry I got all riled up. I just don’t respond well to people calling me dense! ;)

    I’m done with arguing. Buran and I will agree to disagree and leave it at that.

  56. Benstein says:

    Am I the only one that thinks it strange that someone making so little money has a $46k+ limit on her CC?

  57. magus_melchior says:

    While it’s often frustrating to read people missing your point, the louder a post, the more likely it’ll be tuned out. Best to keep a cool head in discussion.

  58. Consumerist Moderator - ACAMBRAS says:

    @magus_melchior:

    Well put — thanks.

    Let’s ease up on the caps lock, ok folks? :)

  59. Buran says:

    @pinkbunnyslippers: If collections agencies are hounding her the bank no longer holds the account. Or do you not read other articles on debt collectors, either?

  60. Buran says:

    @bonzombiekitty: See my latest post for an explanation. Guess past articles on debt collectors and how people have contacted the original lender and been told “you don’t owe us anymore, we can’t help you” went over certain heads.

    What good does it do to contact someone who CAN’T HELP YOU ANYMORE?

  61. rrjackson says:

    Commenting on what is a written “sound byte” of an arbitration story
    The story doesn’t clarify that the victim was accused of being
    responsible for $46,000 in actual card charges, fraudulent or
    otherwise, just that’s what a credit card’s hired arbiter ruled she
    owed.

    While I was recently hospitalized through ER I came back to a credit
    card with $2000 in just fees, tagged on to what I had owed before. I
    also had a bank account with -950, all entirely from those light speed
    NSF auto pay denials I was unable to turn off while down. I was
    grateful to be alive, and come home to…UGH!

    Neither company actually lost anything in my own case, but I owe
    them about $3000 for their “losses”. So with missing info in her story,
    I don’t know if there’s more she could or should have done to avoid the
    puppet court judgement. She could maybe have scanned her bills closer?

    MY CC bills are in typically in a huge pile of ads and mail-order
    catalogs. I see only a percentage of my actual paper statements in our
    fine junk mail system. That’s why I set up auto pay (and got toasted
    anyway). Typical I have other’s card statements and other’s mail too in
    the 80%-90% mail sorting hits. These hardcore credit organizations use
    US mail, which means they don’t care if you get your bill or not
    really. Obviously it pays them more if you don’t see the bill, in the
    end.

    Consumers must be vigilant, no doubt, but with blind arbitration
    ruling more and more of our lives, we have limits. People who are
    smugly secure nothing like this could happen to them, are unaware
    monsters are very real in American business. Real, scary, ugly,
    monsters.

    I would speculate this arbitration ruling to be heavily fee loaded,
    including some big forced arbitration fees. The CC company may have
    even suspected fraudulent charges on the card, but why should those
    card companies really worry about their customers as current laws are,
    when their customers misfortunes our often money in the bank to the CC
    companies.

  62. bonzombiekitty says:

    @Buran: My point is that she wanted information specific to the credit card account – i.e. who made the charges. A collection agency will not have that information. The credit card company should have that information on record. That’s still ignoring the fact that you don’t just ignore collection agencies saying you owe them a bunch of money.

    Either way, she might be screwed. There are laws on the amount of time you have to object to a charge. I think you have 3 months to object to a fraudulent charge. If you failed to keep track of your own credit card that you signed up for, fraudulent charges were made on it, and you don’t object to the charges in the proper amount of time then really it’s your own fault.

    Lesson of the day: Pay attention to your @*@#&*@ credit card statement.

  63. Buran says:

    @bonzombiekitty: She was an ID theft victim. She probably didn’t GET the statements. Crooks change the address on the bill so you won’t be alerted and close the account. That her fault too?

  64. Buran says:

    @bonzombiekitty: And you still aren’t acknowledging that she didn’t ignore them – THEY ignored HER – so she assumed it was a scam (smart).

  65. Charles Duffy says:

    @bonzombiekitty: If the collection agency bought the debt, it’s their responsibility to be able to prove that that debt is valid.

  66. iwallet says:

    Of course, its a horrible story.The identity theft is now very common, we must be aware of.

    Let me introduce something very new and smart…
    I have a new product that will help you prevent identity theft. This wallet is named iWallet! This is a hi-tech credit card and cash wallet that uses biometric fingerprint reader to identify the owner of the wallet. Also this wallet is connected to selected PDA’s using Blue tooth technology which will produce an alarm if the phone and wallet is over 30ft in distance.

    Hope this will definitely help you.
    Check http://www.iwalletusa.com for more details.