What Debt Collectors Will Not Say, but the Debtor Should Know

In recent years, as America’s economy has floundered, many people have found themselves considering bankruptcy.  A unifying theme that recurs in almost every consultation with a prospective client includes tales of the incessant calls made by bill collectors.  Those calls can make an overwhelming time seem unbearable.

In 2011, Reader’s Digest magazine published an article entitled “13 Things a Debt Collector Won’t Tell You.”  Michelle Crouch, the author, summarized a behind-the-scenes perspective of the debt collection industry offered by debt collectors and former debt collection agency employees, which we at The Brad Hendricks Law Firm believe includes some truly candid insights to keep in mind if you or a loved one falls into difficult financial times and are being hounded by debt collectors:

1. The more money the collector is able to collect, the larger his or her bonus check will be.
2. Debt collectors may hound you for the full amount of your debt, but most collectors are, in fact, authorized to settle on a reduced rate that may be 15 to 35 percent lower than the total debt.
3. Often, collection calls come from debt collection companies that have purchased large debt portfolios from original merchants or credit card companies for pennies on the dollar.  What they may later collect from you is simply icing on the cake.  More importantly, though, the fact that the portfolios are purchased for so little by the debt collector means that many of them are willing to accept a reduced amount to settle your debt in full.
4. Debt collectors will not voluntarily inform you that the statute of limitations associated with the debt may have already expired.  It is important to avoid making any promise to the caller until that information is known.  We have seen cases in which debt collectors have called trying to solicit payments on debts that are between 15 to 20 years old.  The statute of limitations in Arkansas for the typical credit card debt is 5 years.  Any promise to the creditor to pay even a reduced payment may revive the debt so that the statute of limitations no longer bars collection.  Be aware of this, and it could be your greatest defense against a debt collector.  The statute of limitations for most debts, under Arkansas law, ranges from two to five years.
5. Debt collectors are not allowed to call you at work.  Ever.  If they call after you have asked them to stop, you may have a claim under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.  You may be able to recover your damages, attorney’s fees, and costs from the collector.  Keep in mind that the statute of limitations for a claim under the FDCPA is one year from the alleged violation of the Act by a collector.
6. Debt collectors will not tell you that the FDCPA also prohibits them from threatening to have you arrested, using profanity, or calling between the hours of 9 p.m. and 8 a.m.

Dealing with debt that has gone into collections can create massive amounts of stress for a debtor and the debtor’s family.  Much of the stress comes from a general lack of knowledge of how the debt collection process works and the laws governing debt collection. 

If you or a loved one has been repeatedly contacted by debt collectors, we have included some things for you to keep in mind when dealing with the collector.  If negotiating with the creditor fails, you may have other options.  Call The Brad Hendricks Law Firm at (501) 588-0549 or (866) 676-5096 to schedule a free consultation with a member of our Bankruptcy Department, led by Lyndsey Dilks, to discuss those options and whether you might be protected under the law.

Lyndsey Dilks joined The Brad Hendricks Law Firm in 2008 and was specifically recruited to create and develop the firm’s Bankruptcy Department.  Lyndsey has been named as one of the Best Bankruptcy Attorneys in Little Rock by Soirée Magazine.  Her practice is devoted exclusively to Bankruptcy matters.  Caroline Lewis joined the firm in 2009 and has assisted the Bankruptcy Department in Chapter 7 and Chapter 13 cases since 2011. 

Tweets may be used against you in a court of law

In an era where social media has become a popular source of information, you should be aware that the things you say on Twitter (or Facebook, or "Insert Next Big Social Platform Name Here") may be used against you in a court of law – no Miranda warnings (or other prior notice) required.

This lesson was learned the hard way by Omiesha Daniels, who was injured in a car wreck in Georgia.  Originally, Ms. Daniels sued for more than $1.1 million in damages.  Although the jury originally awarded Ms. Daniels $237,000, the award was reduced to $142,000, after the defense used Ms. Daniels’ tweets against her.

In a personal injury lawsuit such as Ms. Daniels’ case, she has the burden of proving the extent of her injuries, which may include medical bills, ongoing medical treatment, and lost wages.  Even where the defendant’s liability is not in dispute, however, the any defense attorney worth her salt will try to prove that the plaintiff’s injuries are not as severe as claimed.  Often, the plaintiff’s statements, including those made online, may be the most vital evidence of all.

Ms. Daniels claimed that her injuries prevented her from returning to work as a hairstylist, but her tweets described parties in New Orleans, beach romps during spring breaks.  A photograph of her carrying a purse on the arm that had been broken did not help Ms. Daniels, either.   In response to the evidence presented against her, Ms. Daniels claimed that the handbag was not heavy, and her attorney advised that the jury did not understand the complexity of her job.  Ultimately, according to the defense attorney, Ms. Daniels’ tweets were her undoing. 

Seatbelt Use at Record High, Says NHTSA

That National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (“NHTSA”) has released the results of a recent study regarding the use of seatbelts by Americans.  According to the NHTSA’s survey, seatbelt use has reached an all-time high in 2012 – roughly 86% of travelers are buckling up, as opposed to the 84% in 2011.  The most dramatic increase in seatbelt use, according to the NHTSA, has been seen in the southern region of the United States, where seatbelt use rose from 80% in 2011 to 85% in 2012.

Seatbelt use has steadily increased since 1994, the NHTSA reports, but continues to be higher in states with primary belt laws, which allow law enforcement officers to issue citations to motorists solely for not using a seatbelt rather than requiring additional traffic violations. In the United States, only New Hampshire has no law on the books regarding seatbelt use (although it does have a law that applies to all drivers and passengers under the age of 18 years).  32 states and the District of Columbia have passed primary laws requiring seatbelt use, while another 17 states have secondary laws. New Hampshire is the only state that has not enacted either a primary or secondary seatbelt law, though the state’s primary child passenger safety law applies to all drivers and passengers under the age of 18.

This post is brought to you from The Brad Hendricks Law Firm as a service to provide legal and other information of public interest. If you have any questions about this or any other post, please contact our firm at (501) 221-0444 or (800) 603-5100 or email us. Our firm provides legal counsel in the areas of Personal Injury,Medical Malpractice, Social Security, Bankruptcy, Business Law,Employment Law, and Family Law, among others.

Injured by Hip-on-Hip Metal Implants?

The Food and Drug Administration announced recently that it is gathering and reviewing information related to metal-on-metal hip implant systems.  According to the FDA, “[h]ip joint deterioration can lead to symptoms such as pain, stiffness or difficulty walking. When symptoms do not respond to conservative treatment, patients may be advised to undergo total hip replacement or hip resurfacing. Patients may receive a “metal-on-metal” hip implant in which the “ball and socket” of the device are both made from metal.”

Unfortunately, recent developments outlined in medical journals and other literature suggests that many metal-on- metal implants are defective.  A recent study indicated that up to 50% of patients with a metal on metal implant may be forced to undergo revision surgery within six years of receiving the implant.

These implants are defective and fail due to a design flaw for two principle reasons.  First, the device slips or the shell does not sit in place in the hip and it resists bone growth. Second, the friction of the metal on metal (metal hip ball and metal hip socket) causes microscopic shavings and metal debris to be released into the surrounding tissue and blood. This can lead to a painful, inflammatory reaction in the tissue and high blood metal content. For these reasons our firm is expanding representation to include other metal on metal hip implants.

Many doctors are recommending that patients with a metal on metal implant undergo blood testing to determine whether their patient has high levels of cobalt or chromium in the patient’s blood stream. You may want to consider asking your doctor to perform such blood tests.

If you have received a hip implant since 2003, or if you have been advised to undergo an additional hip replacement surgery, you should contact your doctor immediately to determine which hip replacement device was initially implanted, even if you are currently experiencing no adverse symptoms or side effects. Complications from these devices can occur at any time.

If you have a metal-on-metal hip replacement implant, please call The Brad Hendricks Law Firm today to discuss your rights and potential claim.  at (501) 588-0549 or (866) 676-5096.

For all your legal needs, and for your peace of mind, you can count on us.

REBLOG – Guest Column: Tort reform would be a bad thing | The Rock River Times

Guest Column: Tort reform would be a bad thing

By David Soll

We have all heard the term “tort reform.” First, a “tort” is a non-criminal civil wrongdoing that is caused either on purpose or through negligence in which the act, intentional or otherwise, has caused physical, mental or monetary damage. You, the injured party, has the legal right to sue the wrongdoer for damages.

To use one layman’s example, if you are harmed by people who run a chemical company that have decided to save a few dollars by dumping their company’s toxic goo into the ground — and that goo reaches the water table and directly results in your cancer diagnosis — you can sue for the pain and suffering you would not have otherwise endured if not for the negligence of that chemical company.

Read More:  Guest Column: Tort reform would be a bad thing | The Rock River Times.

Injured by Transvaginal Mesh/Bladder Slings to treat Pelvic Organ Prolapse or Stress Urinary Incontinence?

Little Rock, AR Transvaginal Mesh and Bladder Sling Attorneys

The Brad Hendricks Law Firm is investigating claims of severe complications associated with the use of transvaginal surgical mesh and bladder slings, which have been surgically installed to treat Pelvic Organ Prolapse (“POP”) and Stress Urinary Incontinence (“SUI”).

Pelvic Organ Prolapse occur when pelvic organs drop from their normal position because the tissues and muscles of the pelvic floor are no longer able to support the organs, which the uterus and bladder.  The muscles and tissue may become torn or weakened because of childbirth or age.  For several years surgical mesh has been used to treat POP and stress urinary incontinence.

Historically, surgical mesh has been used since the 1950s to repair abdominal hernias.  In the 1970s, gynecologists incorporated surgical mesh to treat POP.  Surgical mesh has been used to treat transvaginal POP and SUI since the 1990s.

In 2008, the United States Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) issued a Public Health Notification (“PHN”) to warn patients about adverse effects related to urogynecologic use of surgical mesh.  Between January 1, 2008, and December 31, 2010, 2,874 medical device reports (“MDR”) were submitted chronicling complaints of malfunction, injury and even death.  Of those reports, 1,503 were associated with POP, while 1,371 reports were associated with SUI repairs.  There were 3,979 reports of injury, death and malfunction between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2010.

Unfortunately, the FDA has reported, “[m]esh-associated complications are not rare.”  Approximately 10 of women undergoing transvaginal POP repair experience vaginal mesh erosion within 12 months of surgery.  Mesh contraction, which can cause vaginal shortening, tightening, or vaginal pain is increasingly reported by patients.  Some patients require numerous follow up procedures.

Common Complications from Surgeries that Insert Transvaginal Mesh and Bladder Slings

The most common complications associate with the use of transvaginal mesh and bladder slings include the following:

Mesh erosion through the vaginal tissue
Chronic vaginal drainage
Erosion of the vaginal tissue
Feeling as though something is protruding from the vagina
Lower back pain
Pain during intercourse and Vaginal Pain not related to intercourse
Perforations of the bowel, bladder or blood vessels
Pressure or feeling of “fullness” in the lower abdomen
Reoccurrence of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) or stress urinary incontinence (SUI)
Continued urinary problems
Vaginal bleeding
Vaginal infections
Vaginal pain not related to intercourse
Vaginal scarring

The Securities and Exchange Commission has reported that approximately 47,000 women have received pelvic mesh implants.  To date, more than 600 lawsuits have been filed against manufacturers.

Call Us if You or a Loved One has Been Injured by Transvaginal Mesh used to treat POP or SUI

The Brad Hendricks Law Firm wants to know if you or a loved one has been harmed by transvaginal mesh/bladder slings used to treat Pelvic Organ Prolapse and Stress Urinary Incontinence.  Call The Brad Hendricks Law Firm today at (501) 588-0549 or (866) 676-5096 for a free consultation with an experienced team of lawyers and professionals. If you or a loved one has been harmed by this urological or gynecological use of surgical mesh, you can count us to fight to make sure you are compensated for your injuries.

Related articles

• FDA to Investigate Transvaginal Mesh Injuries
• Bard loses first vaginal mesh lawsuit and must pay $5.5 million in damages
• FDA Warns of Serious Complications Due to Transvaginal Mesh Procedures
• Company to stop selling pelvic mesh tied to lawsuits
• MHRA update: vaginal tapes for stress urinary incontinence

Have a Happy (and Safe) July 4th

As part of its Impaired Driving Prevention Campaign, which lasts from June 10 – July 6, 2012, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has again announced statistics regarding the number of accidents that occur each year as the United States celebrates its independence:

10,228 people were killed by impaired-driving crashes in 2010, a total that represents 31% of all traffic-related deaths in this country.

On average, an alcohol-impaired driving fatality occurs every 51 minutes.

In 2010, 392 people died over the Fourth of July holiday period (6:00 p.m. on July 2 – 5:59 a.m. on July 6). 

39% of the crashes in 2010 involved at least one driver or motorcycle driver with a blood alcohol concentration of at least .08.

46% of the fatalities were between the ages of 18 and 34

In 2010, more than 80% of the alcohol-impaired fatalities occurred between 6 p.m. and 5:59 a.m. during the July 4th holiday

NHTSA provided these safety tips:

Plan a safe way home before the fun begins

Before drinking, designate a sober driver

If you’re impaired, use a taxi, call a sober friend or family member, or use public transportation so you are sure to get home safely

Use your community’s sober ride program

If you happen to see a drunk driver on the road, don’t hesitate to contact the police

“Drive Sober or Get Pulled Over.” If you know someone who is about to drive or ride while impaired, take their keys and help them make other arrangements to get to where they are going safely.

Remember, whether you’ve had way too many or just one too many it’s never worth the risk to drive impaired. If law enforcement pulls you over for drunk driving, you will be arrested.

More information on the “Drive Sober or Get Pulled Over” enforcement crackdown can be found on www.nhtsa.gov/drivesober.

This post is brought to you from The Brad Hendricks Law Firm as a service to provide legal and other information of public interest. If you have any questions about this or any other post, please contact our firm at (501) 221-0444 or (800) 603-5100 or email us. Our firm provides legal counsel in the areas of Personal Injury, Medical Malpractice, Social Security, Bankruptcy, Business Law,Employment Law, and Family Law, among others.