Creating a unified environment that includes all communications means and interaction with a robust bank collection and recovery system promotes increased and compliant efficiency.
Optimizing a contact management scheme can help increase right-party contact rates and streamline the communications process. This helps organizations obtain more debt promises-to-pay, more proficiently and with less expenditure.
Unifying client-focused strategies helps deliver payments in full, compliant guidelines, and important recurring partial payment arrangements and agreements. Collectors can even work one-on-one with debtors on assigned accounts.
The right tools, such as CARM-Pro, enhances the productivity of your collectors, saves resources, and improve your overall results.
Managing all of activities with a comprehensive contact management suite combined with a complete debt recovery system allows banks and credit unions to customize their most efficient recovery strategies.
Some typical tools available include the capability to handle both outbound and inbound calls simultaneously, dialing automatically to adjust for fluctuating call volumes while optimizing collector activity, automated call distribution for intelligent incoming call handling, advanced reporting, interactive voice response and messaging; and smart predictive dialer phone systems that combine voice messaging.
Collections centers can also utilize agent monitoring, call recording for training, coaching and compliance; as well as email, text, and web support to unify services for multimedia channels completely.
Banks reconciling commercial debt successfully on their own using robust collection software retain control of costs and account holders.
Fair Debt Practices
The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) – enacted in 1978, before the Internet, or even cell phones – is a federal law intended to protect consumers from unscrupulous or harassing practices. However, the FDCPA, Therefore, especially concerning technology, the FDCPA can be less than clear.
FDCPA compliance is a good business practice. Most states have enacted their own consumer protection statutes that parallel the FDCPA. For example, in California, the Rosenthal Act provides penalties for unlawful practices. Unlike the FDCPA, many of the state statutes apply even to creditors collecting their own debts.
When it is okay to leave a voicemail message for a consumer debtor creates a problematic compliance situation. Forging the dilemma are two separate requirements of the FDCPA that can interact in unexpected ways: 15 U.S.C. Section 1692e (11) requires a debt collector identify itself in every communication with the consumer; and 15 U.S.C. Section 1692c (b) prohibits debt collectors from communicating information about the consumer’s debt to third parties.
Leaving a voice mail message has been frequently and unanimously held by the courts to be a “communication” that requires a debt collector to identify themselves. However, leaving a message that identifies the nature of the call could result in a violation by revealing information to a third party.
If the voice mail identifies as the debtor, and solely as the debtor, you can leave a message. If, however, the voicemail identifies the debtor and someone else, such as a spouse or parent, you are risking a violation if you leave a message that would be a violation if made to a third party. If the voice mail does not identify the recipient, but only restates the number, you are definitely in danger of a violation.
In addition to providing the right technology, IBS offers clients with ongoing and dependable training for your staffs. Our Online Self-Guided User Training Modules provides interactive training at no additional cost to support IBS clients.