When dealing with a debt collection company, one would be led to believe that there would be a certain degree of respect to be had. After all, the details within the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act practically boast professionalism as a necessity. However, it doesn't seem like this is the case for one company in particular that attacked a mother-of-five who was unable to pay off a debt. While money owed is important and should be given in a timely manner, one has to wonder if bad debt collections will mar this company's reputation forever.
The company that's been accused of making hurtful remarks is the Advantis Credit Union and the targeted woman is 27-year-old Danielle Mangar. You may believe that this story is tragic at first, as if Mangar is the sympathetic figure, five children under her roof, while neither she nor her husband are unable to make the payment that they owe. However, the issue of bad debt collections is brought to life once she was on the phone with the operator. He believed he had her on hold, but she was fully able to hear him say, "you should have learnt to keep your legs shut."
It wouldn't be difficult to argue that Advantis acted in an unprofessional manner towards Mangar and while this isn't exactly a lie, there's always a second perspective to each story. Many people who have read the story online made comments that actually support the company, not Mangar. They said that she was the one who decided to have a family she couldn't afford to support while many other families have been able to do so with success. Why should she complain about her life that no one but herself is to blame?
The argument as to whether or not this can be viewed as bad debt collections in action can be debated on in an endless loop. Companies that are sound in terms of morals like R-R-S can follow the rules with no trouble whatsoever and clients and debtors alike feel as though they can reach an agreement in a nonviolent way. Organizations that blatantly disregard the rules aren't treated well, such as in the case of Advantis. The operator made a personal attack on a customer and whether or not it was intended to be heard is a moot point. Punishment should be dealt and no amount of saying "can't feed them, don't breed them" will change that.
While I try with all that I am to be as fair as possible as far as these kinds of stories go, there's no denying that Advantis's comment, while abusive, holds a lot of weight and the operator has a point. A couple should have the means to support a family, if they want to have children, and bad choices due to an obvious oversight shouldn't be rewarded. Hardworking people suffer as well if tax dollars are taken into account. It's hard to truly defend Mangar on this issue and while the operator working for Advantis would have been smart to keep his comments to himself, maybe an example of harsh reality was needed.
The company that's been accused of making hurtful remarks is the Advantis Credit Union and the targeted woman is 27-year-old Danielle Mangar. You may believe that this story is tragic at first, as if Mangar is the sympathetic figure, five children under her roof, while neither she nor her husband are unable to make the payment that they owe. However, the issue of bad debt collections is brought to life once she was on the phone with the operator. He believed he had her on hold, but she was fully able to hear him say, "you should have learnt to keep your legs shut."
It wouldn't be difficult to argue that Advantis acted in an unprofessional manner towards Mangar and while this isn't exactly a lie, there's always a second perspective to each story. Many people who have read the story online made comments that actually support the company, not Mangar. They said that she was the one who decided to have a family she couldn't afford to support while many other families have been able to do so with success. Why should she complain about her life that no one but herself is to blame?
The argument as to whether or not this can be viewed as bad debt collections in action can be debated on in an endless loop. Companies that are sound in terms of morals like R-R-S can follow the rules with no trouble whatsoever and clients and debtors alike feel as though they can reach an agreement in a nonviolent way. Organizations that blatantly disregard the rules aren't treated well, such as in the case of Advantis. The operator made a personal attack on a customer and whether or not it was intended to be heard is a moot point. Punishment should be dealt and no amount of saying "can't feed them, don't breed them" will change that.
While I try with all that I am to be as fair as possible as far as these kinds of stories go, there's no denying that Advantis's comment, while abusive, holds a lot of weight and the operator has a point. A couple should have the means to support a family, if they want to have children, and bad choices due to an obvious oversight shouldn't be rewarded. Hardworking people suffer as well if tax dollars are taken into account. It's hard to truly defend Mangar on this issue and while the operator working for Advantis would have been smart to keep his comments to himself, maybe an example of harsh reality was needed.
About the Author:
Click here today if you are looking for some more information on collecting bad debt services.
No comments:
Post a Comment