Monday, March 05, 2012

McCune Davis: HB 2664 will hurt Arizonans and the economy, benefits out-of-state debt collectors

STATE CAPITOL, PHOENIX – Rep. Debbie McCune Davis, D-Phoenix (District 14), says that HB 2664 is bad for the economy and could empower out-of-state debt collectors to force Arizona citizens to repay debts they may have already paid or that have been dismissed or forgiven.

“This is bad legislation that will weaken consumer protection laws and targets families that are struggling financially,” McCune Davis said. “It benefits out-of-state debt buyers, companies that purchase and attempt to collect debt after it has gone into default.”

HB 2664 gives debt collectors the power to accuse almost anyone of owing a debt without having to show a contract. If this bill passes a debt buyer would be able to sue a person with little evidence. The lawsuit could proceed if the company had something as simple as a spreadsheet showing a name and an alleged amount due or a generic credit card agreement – even if the debt was already been paid or dismissed.

Peoria resident Hayden Scheider, who is speaking out against HB 2664, said that he was a victim of mistaken identity and was sued for a debt he did not owe.

“I was sued by a debt buyer for a debt that was not mine. I won because the debt buyer didn’t have a proper basis for the lawsuit,” he said. “HB 2664 will allow a debt buyer to continue with a lawsuit even without a proper basis. HB 2664 will help out-of-state debt buyers and hurt Arizona families.”

"Middle-class families, Arizona’s economic engine, deserve to have the legislature focus on good ideas to put people back to work, not ideas that benefit special interest groups from other states," McCune Davis said. "Most states are strengthening consumer protection laws in this industry, but this legislation would weaken them in Arizona.

“This is an industry that is rife with abuse and this bill will only worsen the problem,” McCune Davis said.



  1. It is bad enough that Arizona is a "debtors prison" state, allowing debtors to be incarcerated for their debts, but this bill is beyond the pale. I wonder, was it written by ALEC, the Goldwater Institute or both?

  2. So much for the general idea of innocent until proven guilty, which should also apply to the collection of debts.

    In this era of rampant identity theft, not to mention the many cases of mistaken identity, or the many cases of debt collectors attempting to collect debts from people with similar names, this bill will make it very easy for debt collectors to sue people who don't even owe the debt, win a judgment against them and then garnish their wages to pay a debt they never applied for in the first place.

    Debt collectors should have the burden of proof. They should have to provide the credit card agreement, signed by the debtor, as well as the monthly statements from the credit card showing what was purchased, where it was purchased, when it was purchased, and how much it cost. Is this too much to ask? I don't think so.

    Otherwise, they can claim incorrect amounts and not have to substantiate their claims with any proof.