Once again when you call out shills and scammers they tend not respind back

Ok "Member of NAFI?" if you say who you are then why are going after bad checks??

On the NAF website (http://www.nafraud.com/) it states they are for

NAFI - The National Association of Fraud Investigators was established to improve communications and to expand the networking of those in investigation and related fields which include but is not limited to Law Enforcement, insurance investigators, professional investigators, security specialists, bond enforcement agents, attorneys, forensic examiners, tracers/locators, credit card investigators, auto theft investigators, international counterparts.  

I don't see CHECK FRAUD... the so called Fraud investigators that are call people are NOT legit. No one is ever served and if you default on a payday loan especially online you do not commit check fraud. You default on a LOAN. Your checking info or check is used for collateral.

Why are you looking on this website? Based on the number above NO one is a member of NAFI in Indiana
and while I am at Mr Scott Lattimer, Esq.. exactly where do you work? A simple google search and we find nothing for a Scott Lattimer... hmmm again payday loans are LOANS!! the check is your collateral if you do it in person and your checking information on line...You fail to pay a payday loan you are in default of a LOAN!!

I wanted to give folks on this site some true insight into what is actually going on when someone like Investigator Scott calls regarding a pending case stemming from a bad check.  Many District Attorney's offices are participating in Check Diversion Programs or Bad Check Restitution Programs.  Following a few quotes I found by running a simple google search on these types of programs:

?In an effort to collect worthless checks in a more timely and convenient manner for the merchant and to alleviate the need to prosecute each Worthless Check case, the District Attorney?s Offices provides a program that helps both the merchants and the writer of the worthless check - Check Diversion Programs.  Fraud investigation companies are contracted by many DA offices to run these programs and to locate and notify the defendants of the pending charges and facilitate payment of the restitution in lieu of the criminal charges being filed."

"Prosecution Diversion Program is program with the District Attorney's office whereby if a person is notified of the bad check and then makes good on the check, including all fees and costs, within the deadline then no warrant will be issued."

"A bad check restitution program (BCRP) is a program that works to retrieve funds from bad check writers in order to repay moneys owed to the recipients of the checks. These programs are run by prosecutors in jurisdictions across the United States."

it is important to understand that the check diversion companies are not debt collection agencies - therefore the investigators are not required to abide by Fair Debt Collection Practices laws as they are not collecting on the bad debt however attempting to prevent the criminal charges.  These programs save the taxpayers a tremendous amount of money in not prosecuting the 100s of cases per year, housing the defendant in county jail etc.  In addition, the programs can really help the defendants as they are given the opportunity to pay the restitution for the bad check and keep the charges off their record.  As the DAs are withholding adjudication, the defendant will not have to face criminal charges, carry a record of felony convictions and be on felony probation which will cost the defendant much more than the restitution they pay.

I have a case load of 1,000+ accounts and often hear individuals claim that they are being called "repeatedly" or being "harassed."  It is very important to understand that with our large case loads, there is no time to make multiple calls to wrong #s or past friends and family.  When I am working to locate a defendant I use in depth state and federal databases that sometimes have outdated information.  I have experienced irate family members that assume I am calling repeatedly when in fact, the defendant has numerous agencies attempting to make contact with them.  Calling a person that is a known associate and/or relative is not harassing and all it takes is to let the investigator know that you do not know the person (if this is true) or haven't has contact with the defendant.  Be sure not to be less than honest as fraud investigations are criminal cases and it is against the law to lie to someone conducting an official investigation.  I know that I am the only person using the # that I call from and family members often exaggerate about being called "several times."  The best thing to do is answer the investigators questions honestly and then ask to be kept out of the investigation if possible.

has called me several times although I have repeatedly asked her (and others calling from this number) not to about a deadbeat relative (apparently) whose whereabouts I do not know. She has also bothered my 83 year old stepmother, who just refuses to answer the phone. The "investigator" insisted this relative was my husband. Most recently was 11/19/2012 around 6 p.m. I am not responsible for this relative; whatever he has done he has to account for it.

I get a call from the same person she is also threatinging my family.  I am also sending a complaint.

You, sir,  have too much time on your hands - maybe you should get a job then you wont have to worry about the tactics that anyone uses to recover money procured fraudulently (if those words are too big for you - this means stealing!).  You stated that this thread has nothing to do with passing bad checks, please read this quote from your own posting:

"In many cases, borrowers write a post-dated check (check with a future date) to the lender; if the borrowers don't have enough money in their account, their check will bounce. Some payday lenders have therefore threatened delinquent borrowers with criminal prosecution for check fraud.[10] This practice is illegal in many jurisdictions."
I am specifically referring to you saying that prosecuting for check fraud is illegal - you are 100% incorrect.  

As far as your comment about "my peers" - I'm not sure who you think my peer group is?  The Esq. behind my name is short for Esquire and knowing how ignorant you are I will explain, this means attorney you moron.

For your information--"Sir"---I do not write checks. Furthermore, this thread does not have anything to do with "passing bad checks" as you so claim, but has everything to do with consumer protection laws, which your industry is notorious for violating as evidenced by this lawsuit filed against one of your peers:

FTC Charges Payday Lending Scheme with Piling Inflated Fees on Borrowers and Making Unlawful Threats when Collecting

Defendants Charged Many Consumers More than Three Times the Amount Borrowed

The Federal Trade Commission has taken action against a payday lending operation that allegedly piled on undisclosed and inflated fees, and collected on loans illegally by threatening borrowers with arrest and lawsuits.  The FTC has asked a federal court to stop the allegedly illegal business tactics while the agency pursues its case against the defendants.

Like other payday lenders in recent years, this operation has claimed in state legal proceedings that it is affiliated with Native American tribes, and therefore immune from legal action.  However, the FTC alleges that the defendants? claims of tribal affiliation do not exempt them from complying with federal law.

This is the second time in seven months that the FTC has brought suit against a payday lender that has used a tribal affiliation defense against actions by state authorities.  The FTC recently expanded its first such case, against Payday Financial, LLC, adding charges that the operation illegally sued debt-burdened consumers in a South Dakota tribal court that did not have jurisdiction over their cases.


Partial screen shot of one payday lending website

involved in the FTC complaint.In this case, as part of its continuing crackdown on scams that target consumers in financial distress, the FTC filed a complaint in U.S. district court charging that a web of defendants, including AMG Services, Inc., three other Internet-based lending companies, seven related companies, and six individuals, violated federal law by deceiving consumers when providing and collecting on payday loans.  One of the defendants who allegedly controlled the lending companies is automobile racer Scott Tucker.  According to documents filed with the court, Tucker and his co-defendant and brother, Blaine Tucker, allegedly transferred more than $40 million dollars collected from consumers by the payday lending companies to another company Scott Tucker controls, Level 5 Motor Sports, for ?sponsorship? fees that benefit Scott Tucker?s automobile racing.  

The Tuckers and the other defendants claimed they would charge borrowers the amount borrowed plus a one-time finance fee.  Instead, the FTC alleges, the defendants made multiple withdrawals from borrowers? bank accounts and assessed a new finance fee each time, without disclosing the true costs of the loan.  The defendants also falsely threatened that consumers could be arrested, prosecuted, or imprisoned for failing to pay and that the defendants would sue them if they did not pay, according to the FTC.  

According to documents filed by the FTC, over the last five years, the defendants? deceptive and illegal tactics have generated more than 7,500 complaints to law enforcement authorities.  In many cases, the defendants? inflated fees left borrowers with supposed debts of more than triple the amount they had borrowed.  In one typical example, the defendants allegedly told consumer Eric Barboza that a $500 loan would cost him $650 to repay.  But the defendants attempted to charge him $1,925 to pay off the $500 loan, and threatened him with arrest when he balked at paying that amount.  

The FTC?s complaint alleges that defendants? misrepresentations and false threats violated the Federal Trade Commission Act.  According to the FTC, the defendants also violated the Truth in Lending Act by failing to accurately disclose the annual percentage rate and other loan terms; and violated the Electronic Fund Transfer Act by illegally requiring consumers to preauthorize electronic fund transfers from their accounts.

Consumers are urged to consider the alternatives to payday loans.  For more information, see, Fraudulent Online Payday Lenders:  Tapping Your Bank Account Again and Again.

The Commission vote authorizing the staff to file the complaint was 4-0.  The FTC brought suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada on April 2, 2012.  The complaint names as defendants Scott A. Tucker; Blaine A. Tucker; Timothy J. Muir; Don E. Brady; Robert D. Campbell; Troy L. LittleAxe; AMG Services, Inc.; Red Cedar Services, Inc.; SFS, Inc.; Tribal Financial Services; AMG Capital Management, LLC; Level 5 Motorsports, LLC; LeadFlash Consulting, LLC; PartnerWeekly, LLC; Black Creek Capital Corporation; Broadmoor Capital Partners, LLC; and The Muir Law Firm, LLC.  The complaint also names as relief defendants Kim C. Tucker and Park 269 LLC.

NOTE:  The Commission files a complaint when it has ?reason to believe? that the law has been or is being violated, and it appears to the Commission that a proceeding is in the public interest.  The complaint is not a finding or ruling that the defendant has actually violated the law.  

The Federal Trade Commission works for consumers to prevent fraudulent, deceptive, and unfair business practices and to provide information to help spot, stop, and avoid them. To file a complaint in English or Spanish, visit the FTC's online Complaint Assistant or call 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357). The FTC enters complaints into Consumer Sentinel, a secure, online database available to more than 2,000 civil and criminal law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and abroad. The FTC's website provides free information on a variety of consumer topics. Like the FTC on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.


MEDIA CONTACT:
Betsy Lordan
Office of Public Affairs
202-326-3707
STAFF CONTACT:
Malini Mithal
Bureau of Consumer Protection
202-326-2972

Nikhil Singhvi
Bureau of Consumer Protection
202-326-3480
(FTC File No. 1123024)  
(AMG Services, Inc. NR)

http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2012/04/amg.shtm

Another false posting - uttering worthless checks, especially on a closed checking account is illegal and can  be prosecuted.  People, please stop giving folks poor legal advice.  Or better yet, go out a write all the bad checks you want - more business for me and peers.

Aggressive collection practices

In US law, a payday lender can use only the same industry standard collection practices used to collect other debts.

In many cases, borrowers write a post-dated check (check with a future date) to the lender; if the borrowers don't have enough money in their account, their check will bounce. Some payday lenders have therefore threatened delinquent borrowers with criminal prosecution for check fraud.[10] This practice is illegal in many jurisdictions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Payday_loan

I am constantly surprised to see how many people have nothing better to do with their lives but to give other people bad advice.  Here is some brief actual, correct information regarding "bad checks."   While the debt from a payday loan in default is handled with civil action - the act passing of a worthless check, non-sufficient funds and/or a check written on an account that is closed is a criminal matter.  Individuals uttering worthless checks, written under any circumstances - for payday loan repayment or otherwise are prosecuted every day in the United States.  If you issue a check from an account that is closed or lacked the funds to cover the check at the time the check is stroked, it is malicious and willful intent to defraud and in some jurisdictions also larceny by check.  You see, it appears that the merchandise and/or funds were procured, with no intention the check being able to clear.  If you have questions regarding legal matters, I urge you to consult with an attorney in your local area as the actual statutes and/or punishment varies in different jurisdictions.  Please do not to take advice from folks that are unaware of the laws, how they are applied and the ramifications of breaking said law.

They called my cell today and did not leave a message.

Nonsense! People don't arrested for payday loan debt because it's treated as civil debt and handled in civil court, not criminal court, hence no arrest and no jail. Writing a bad check for merchandise is criminal fraud with possible arrest and jail. Writing a bad check as a requirement for a payday loan, while it is a bad thing to do, is handled by the law as civil debt with no arrest, no jail.

*rolls eyes*
Shill alert !!

My son received a call from Investigator Scott a couple of weeks ago, she informed him that she was investigating bad checks that my son had written over 2 years ago for a payday loan.  Even though my son had written the check on a closed bank account, I told him to worry about it, that this was a scam.  This past Saturday night we got a knock on the door from police, warrant in hand they arrested my son.  He is sitting in county jail because we don't have the $3407 purge amount that the judge is requiring for his release.  I guess the best advise I can give is - if you have written bad checks try to resolve it because my son is proof that you can be arrested for this and it is going to cost much more than what the investigator said the payday loan company wanted before the charges were filed.

Consumers across the country report that they're getting telephone calls from people trying to collect on loans the consumers never received or on loans they did receive but for amounts they do not owe. Others are receiving calls from people seeking to recover on loans consumers received but where the creditors never authorized the callers to collect for them. So what's the story?

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the nation's consumer protection agency, is warning consumers to be on the alert for scam artists posing as debt collectors. It may be hard to tell the difference between a legitimate debt collector and a fake one. Sometimes a fake collector may even have some of your personal information, like a bank account number. A caller may be a fake debt collector if he:

is seeking payment on a debt for a loan you do not recognize;
refuses to give you a mailing address or phone number;
asks you for personal financial or sensitive information; or
exerts high pressure to try to scare you into paying, such as threatening to have you arrested or to report you to a law enforcement agency.

If you think that a caller may be a fake debt collector:
Ask the caller for his name, company, street address, and telephone number. Tell the caller that you refuse to discuss any debt until you get a written "validation notice." The notice must include the amount of the debt, the name of the creditor you owe, and your rights under the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.
If a caller refuses to give you all of this information, do not pay! Paying a fake debt collector will not always make them go away. They may make up another debt to try to get more money from you.

Stop speaking with the caller. If you have the caller's address, send a letter demanding that the caller stop contacting you, and keep a copy for your files. By law, real debt collectors must stop calling you if you ask them to in writing.

Do not give the caller personal financial or other sensitive information. Never give out or confirm personal financial or other sensitive information like your bank account, credit card, or Social Security number unless you know whom you're dealing with. Scam artists, like fake debt collectors, can use your information to commit identity theft ? charging your existing credit cards, opening new credit card, checking, or savings accounts, writing fraudulent checks, or taking out loans in your name.

Contact your creditor. If the debt is legitimate ? but you think the collector may not be ? contact your creditor about the calls. Share the information you have about the suspicious calls and find out who, if anyone, the creditor has authorized to collect the debt.

Report the call. Contact the FTC and your state Attorney General's office with information about suspicious callers. Many states have their own debt collection laws in addition to the federal FDCPA. Your Attorney General's office can help you determine your rights under your state's law.>

http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/consumer/alerts/alt076.shtm

The same lady called me today for my sister in law. Thanks for posting this since we had no idea what was going on. It's a damn shame ppl pull this crap on others.

A vile and vicious woman who claims she was Inspector Julie Scott but for whom or what is unknown.  Previously called and left threats claiming to be be associated with Oakland County MI law enforcement to try to extort information on a relative.  She told me to "kick rocks" when pressured to state exactly who she was representing, then hang up the phone on me. Whatever the name of this company is they are in no way associated with law enforcement.  A letter is being forwarded to the State Attorney General of Indiana.