Have questions? Call us now at 844-685-9200 for a Free Case Evaluation.
Our services are absolutely FREE to you.
The harassing company pays our fees.
Delta Management Associates or DMA is a third-party collection agency based in Massachusetts. DMA has received consumer complaints alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), including using false or misleading language, making improper contact, and illegal sharing of information. If you have been contacted by Delta Management Associates, make sure you understand your rights before taking action.
According to the Better Business Bureau (BBB), Delta Management Associates, Inc. was founded and incorporated in 1986. The BBB established DMA’s profile page in 2004. DMA is listed as a collection agency with an estimated 200 employees. Buzzfile estimates Delta Management Associates’s annual revenue at $24.2 million.
According to its website, Delta Management Associates’ “experience, knowledge, and expertise, in conjunction with its proven collection strategy, enable…comprehensive collection solutions, including detailed portfolio analysis, outstanding customer service, and a targeted approach designed to provide the greatest return to…clients.” DMA’s mission is “to serve as a seamless extension of…clients’ business offices, capitalizing on…proven business process strategies to provide exceptional results and superior customer service.”
DMA is a full-service collection agency and provides “comprehensive collection solutions that include: account scoring and segmentation, in-depth skip tracing, customized correspondence, dispute resolution, manual and automated contact with consumers, credit bureau reporting, litigation, and account resolution; multiple consumer payment solutions customized to clients’ specific portfolios; detailed reporting packages, including ad hoc reports…; 24/7 Web-based client access…; and dedicated client service representatives.”
DMA collects delinquent accounts for many types of organizations, including student loan providers; government agencies; consumer and retail credit providers; and business lenders. In addition, DMA employs an entire division dedicated to “comprehensive skip tracing solutions” using both automated and manual solutions. Finally, DMA’s “Default Aversion Division is dedicated exclusively to counseling borrowers and helping them understand and manage their loan repayment options.”
Delta Management Associates appears to be well-educated in both federal and state regulatory laws and best practices. They are members of two dozen national and regional professional associations. However, they also convey the impression that they view consumer protection as far less important than their clients’ financial bottom line. Rather than providing links to consumer protection laws or enforcement agencies, their Consumer Resources page only includes information about loan repayment options, wage garnishment, and the many types of payment methods available through their website.
As of February 2018, the Better Business Bureau (BBB) has closed 45 complaints against Delta Management Associates in the preceding 3 years, with 9 complaints closed in the past 12 months.The majority of complaints allege problems with billing and collections, with 17 complaints alleging problems with customer service. As of May 2015, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) has received 51 complaints about DMA. Justia lists at least 4 causes of civil litigation involving DMA
Absolutely. Here are some Sample Cases filed in Federal Court
In September 2017, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, a judge issued a Memorandum Opinion and Order in a wide-ranging complaint alleging several violations—including violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act—by several defendants, including Delta Management Associates. The plaintiff in this case had initially taken out several student loans beginning in 1996 and continuing through 1998. The loans were obtained from private lenders pursuant to the Federal Family Education Loan Program, under which “students obtained loans from private lenders, but the loans were guaranteed by guaranty agencies, which in turn were reinsured by the federal government.” By March 2006, the plaintiff had paid off all his loans except for one. The remaining loan amount was $84,355.00, and in March 2006, the plaintiff received a Federal Loan Application and Promissory Note, which offered to “drastically reduce the interest rates” on the plaintiff’s loan. Although this loan consolidation document did not identify the original consolidating lender; the loan’s maturity date or interest rate; or any information about penalties for default, the plaintiff signed and executed the agreement. By June 2010, he had paid a total of $26,538.36 under the consolidation but began to suspect that the loan servicing company was not conducting itself according to established laws and accounting principles. The plaintiff began questioning the loan servicer, ACS, but they were non-responsive. The plaintiff told them he would not make any payments until they provided details about how they were applying payments and interest, and ACS allegedly responded with “rude and threatening statements …about negative reports to credit bureaus…and that the plaintiff would be sorry he failed to make payments.” The plaintiff stopped making payments and what followed were collection efforts by the originator of the loan (ASA); and two collection agencies—GRS and Delta Management Associates.
The plaintiff’s complaint alleged several violations. Initial collection efforts from Delta Management Associates demanded a payment of $102,267.53 (the principal, plus $2,240.94 in interest and $15,593.51 in fees). Letters from GRS demanded $114,900.14. Neither collection agency answered any of his questions about the validity of the charges. Both collection agencies and ASA also placed several phone calls to the plaintiff’s cell phone, initially on a daily basis, then slowing to about two calls per month. The calls persisted after the plaintiff requested that they be discontinued. The calls failed to disclose the identity of the caller and were made using an automated telephone dialing system (ATDS). The complaint contained six charges in all: “Count I asserted a claim against all of the defendants seeking a declaratory judgment that the loan agreement was unenforceable; Count II claimed a violation of the FDCPA; Count III charged all defendants with defamation; Count IV alleged that ASA, GRS, and DMA violated the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Practices Act; Count V charged ASA with a violation of the Illinois Interest Act; and Count VI charged ASA, GRS, and DMA with violating the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA).
The September 2017 hearing was held to determine whether the defendants’ motion to dismiss the charges would be approved. After a lengthy legal analysis, the court dismissed only Count III for all defendants. The rest the charges were upheld as valid. Delta Management Associates specifically was held liable for charges under Counts I, II, and IV, with certain restrictions. Furthermore, the plaintiff was given permission to “replead any of his claims…with the court…to determine…whether further amendment of the complaint will be permitted.”
Delta Management Associates, Inc.
P.O. Box 9191
Chelsea, MA 02150-9191
Understanding Your Debt Collection Rights
The Fair Debt Collections Practices Act (FDCPA) and the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) are enforced by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). The FDCPA regulates the behavior of collection agencies by prohibiting actions such as the use of abusive or threatening language; harassment; or the use of false or misleading information to collect a debt.
The FCRA regulates how collection agencies and creditors report delinquent debts to credit reporting agencies. Additional consumer protection laws include the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) and the Consumer Financial Protection Act (CFPA). The complaint above illustrates how these laws can be extremely effective tools to hold accountable collection agencies who fail to adhere to their provisions.
These laws also provide individuals with a means to seek monetary damages in court. For example, the FDCPA allows consumers who have been violated to recover damages of up to $1,000, plus attorney fees and court costs.
Seek legal assistance to find the relief you may be entitled to if you are having difficulty resolving disputes with a debt collection agency.
Your debt harassment checklist:
- You are receiving multiple calls per week from third party collection agencies
- You are receiving early morning or late night calls from debt collectors
- You are recieving calls at work from a debt collection agency
- Debt collectors are calling your friends, neighbors, or coworkers
- Collectors are threatening you with violence, lawsuit, or arrest
- A debt collector attempts to collect more than you owe
- You are being threatened with negative credit reporting
- A debt collector attempts to intimidate you
- Criminal accusations are being made towards you
- Use of obscene language during an attempt to collect
- Automated robocalls are being made to your phone in an attempt to collect
If you’ve been harassed by debt collectors and even one of these has happened to you, we can help. We will fight for your rights.
We can make them STOP!✋
The Lemberg Law legal team is committed to holding debt collectors accountable, so complete our form for a FREE case evaluation, or call 844-685-9200 NOW. ?
What Our Clients are Saying
“Every e-mail sent or phone call made to your firm was answered not only promptly, but virtually immediately. Mr. Hirnyk patiently explained every legal concept – including what was possible and what was not – under existing state and federal consumer law.”
“Prior to contacting you, we had tried repeatedly to handle this matter without threatening litigation. In the end, not only were they unapologetic, but they were dismissive – even of an attorney friend who called on our behalf. Sincerest thanks for resolving this matter for us!”
“Know that Sergei, and your firm did a good thing. You took on a big company for little people and righted a wrong. For this we are grateful.”
“Thank you and your team at Lemberg Law for the exceptional work you did on my behalf. I have never experienced the level of care, professionalism, timeliness in follow-through, and monetary compensation obtained through your firm.”
We can absolutely help. Call us today.
Have you had a bad experience with this agency’s debt collectors? Sound off and share your experience with other visitors in the comment box below.