Complaint Review: Frederick J. Hanna & Associates PC - marietta Georgia

MTS,

Beware of paying Hanna anything.  It is highly likely that you will not get any credit for your payments on your credit report from them.  They also may not release the lien or judgment even if you pay them in full.  See below.  Rip Off Report is full of complaints like yours where they have done unauthorized drafts out of checking accounts. 

It is also doubtful whether they were being honest about who owns the debt.  You can have a look at your credit report to see if Cap1 did a charge off.  If so, then Cap1 may not own it anymore, and if so that would mean Hanna is not being honest with you if they claim that Cap1 does own it and that they "represent" them.  You may have to file bankruptcy to get rid of Hanna if there is a judgment.   

***

The Georgia Supreme Court says Hanna is a "law firm," so you have to submit a bar complaint vs. them (and not a consumer complaint with the state OCA or federal FTC -- but fine if you do that too anyway).  You may submit a bar complaint vs. Fred Hanna (the owner of the "firm") and any atty. that may have contacted you that also violated bar rules for atty.s:

(Call and ask for a bar complaint, and if they have them online):

State Bar of Georgia
www.gabar.org
104 Marietta St. NW, Suite 100
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
(404) 527-8700
(800) 334-6865
FAX: (404) 527-8717

***

See below for info. on where to look for sample do-not-call letters vs. Hanna, and how to fight Hanna lawsuits and WIN (feel free to post on here too for more info.):

Info. for fighting Hanna lawsuits:

http://www.beatdebtcollectors.com/

http://nextlevelunlimited.net/blog/fredrick-j-hanna-collection-debt-or-hanna-barbera-crook-or-cartoon/

http://www.ripoffreport.com/Search/Body/Frederick-J_-Hanna.aspx

Submit a Georgia bar complaint vs. Fred Hanna and other Hanna attorneys:

http://gabar.org/contact_the_bar/

***

Sample do-not-call/ validation letter vs. Hanna:


Date:  April 4, 2012

Frederick J. Hanna & Associates, P.C.
Debt Collectors
1427 Roswell Rd.
Marietta, GA  30062

Account number(s):  (See Enclosed)       
                  
RE:  Request for Validation of Debt, 15 U.S.C. 1692g

Dear Sir or Madam:

This is my formal notice that I am disputing this debt, and requesting immediate validation under Section 809 of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. 1692g, of the debt from your office.  I am requesting that your office immediately send me a copy of the following documents: (a) the name, address, and phone number of an employee of the original creditor that can validate the debt, (b) proof of who is the current legal owner of the debt, and that you represent the original creditor or debt buyer, and (c) the original signed note, contract, credit agreement, or instrument creating the debt.

I am disputing this debt for the following reasons:  this debt has not been validated.  I do not know whether your debt collection company is the legal owner of this debt or not, or if the amounts charged are valid.

This is also my formal notice under 15 U.S.C. 1692c, to you to cease all further communications with me, my family members, and my associates and all third parties, unless I give you express permission to do so.  You have my express permission to mail me the requested validation documents to the address listed below, but I do not give you permission to contact me over the phone, or in any other way except as specifically addressed in this letter.
                 
This letter is not meant in any way to be an acknowledgment that I owe this money.

Sincerely,

John Doe
P.O. Box 0000
Marietta, GA  30062

***

I would disagree with your statement.  This is not a simple of case of "choosing not to pay bills."  If an individual becomes unemployed and has $0 in income, then considerations need to made, especially with regards to the current state of our economy.  The law firm works for Capital One and offers client services.  Part of these services should include answering the phone and returning phone calls within a timely manner.  Also, when the firm states that "they called and there was no voice mail setup so they could not leave a message," but Capital One, the creditor, can leave a message then it is obvious that the firm has unethical practices and is lying about what services they are/are not providing.  This method is being practiced because there is no paper trail to hold the firm accountable.  Furthermore, garnishment is right given to the firm/creditor, but its enforcement is a choice.  Thus, if a firm chooses to ignore incoming phone calls and messages, lies about attempted communications, then immediately moves forward with garnishment it is obvious that they are simply trying to take advantage of the situation to obtain financial gain.  There is a clear difference in doing the right thing versus the wrong thing.  If you Google the firm's name you will find report after report.  There are reasons why these reports exist and it is not because people do not like to have their money taken.  It is because of how this firm handles client services.  Capital One's Recovery department expressed concern over how this situation is being handled.  You can be ethical, provide excellent customer service and still get all your money, but only if you choose to be that kind of company.

And by the way, anyone who volunteers the statement "I do not work for the firm" probably works for the firm or has ties to the firm.  It is a natural response commonly used by individuals trying to escape a bias point of view.  Stick to the facts.  Garnishment is a great resource when all other avenues have been attempted.  Unfortunately, no avenue can be attempted without communication. 

Capital One needs to give serious thought as to how they want to be represented.  Is this truly the type of company they want their clients to have to deal with.  The true irony here is if Frederick Hanna & Associates had simply called me back we could have negotiated a temporary suspension of payments for three months and they could have received a lump sum payment for the negotiated balance.  They would have received their money sooner.  But instead they wanted to act like "legal crooks". 

Capital One receives/received assistance through the government.  Which indicates they acknowledge the issues we are dealing with as a country.  They need to consider how this reflects on them as a company to allow a firm like Frederick Hanna & Associates to take advantage of tax payers that are ultimately floating the bill for big bank bailouts. 

Once again, this is about doing the right thing, the ethical thing, and maintaining professionalism.  Not about doing what you can get away with.  Which is actually debatable anyways, the more this firm continues these sorts of practices the less they will be utilized due to public image.

Goodnight.

You went to court because they sued you.  You lost in court and they obtained a judgement against you.  In many jurisdictions that judgement also authorizes garnishment without the need for additional action by the plaintiff.  You got to this situation because you failed to place importance on paying your bills.  They extended a helping hand to you by agreeing to lower damages and even offered a repayment plan.  Again you failed to pay your bills.  They exercised their rights under the law.

No, I don't work for them.