New York City – The phone rang. A woman from a law firm representing a collection agency wanted to know if Mark Hoyte was Mark Hoyte, and he said he was. They were calling to collect $919 on a Sears-Citi card.
Subscribe to our Daily Roundup Email
A judge ruled that Mark Hoyte was entitled to be compensated wages lost the day he was summoned to court. He was wrongly sued for credit card debt.
Mr. Hoyte said he never had that credit card.
Then the woman wanted to know if his Social Security number ended in 92, and Mr. Hoyte said no, it ended in 33.
“She says to me, ‘Your date of birth is in 1972,’ ” Mr. Hoyte, 46, recalled in an interview.
Clearly, they had the wrong Mark Hoyte. But that did not stop the lawyers at Pressler & Pressler from suing him. They swore out a complaint and sent a summons to Mr. Hoyte, ordering him to be in court last Monday.
Then things took a rare turn.
Every day of the year, 1,000 cases on average are added to the civil court dockets in New York City over credit card debt — a high-volume, low-accuracy moment of reckoning. The suits are usually brought by collection companies that purchase the debt for pennies on the dollar from card issuers and then work with a cadre of law firms that specialize in collection work.
Conducting a digital dragnet, they troll through commercial databases searching for debtors. Because of the vast sloppiness and fraud involved, Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo has shut down two of the collection firms and is suing 35 law firms tied to the business.
A person who blows off a civil court summons — even if wrongly identified — faces a default judgment and frozen bank accounts. But to date, there have been few penalties against collectors for dragging the wrong people into court.
Until Mr. Hoyte turned up last week in Brooklyn.
After trying to settle the case in the hallway — the 11th floor of 141 Livingston Street is an open bazaar of haggling — the collections lawyer realized he had the wrong man. He got Mr. Hoyte to sign an agreement that would end the case against him, but not against the Mark Hoyte who actually owed the $919.
In front of the judge, the lawyer, T. Andy Wang, announced that the parties had reached a stipulation dismissing this Mr. Hoyte from the suit.
Not so fast, said the judge, Noach Dear.
“Why didn’t you check these things out before you take out a summons and a complaint?” Judge Dear asked. “Why don’t you check out who you’re going after?”
Mr. Wang said that Pressler & Pressler used an online database called AnyWho to hunt for debtors.
“So you just shoot in the dark against names; if there’s 16 Mark Hoytes, you go after without exactly knowing who, what, when and where?” Judge Dear asked.
Mr. Wang replied, “That’s why the plaintiff is making an application to discontinue.”
The judge turned to Mr. Hoyte, who works as a building superintendent, and asked him how much a day of lost pay would cost. Mr. Hoyte said $115.
“Do you think that’s fair?” Judge Dear asked Mr. Wang. “That he should lose a day’s pay?”
“My personal opinion,” Mr. Wang said, “would not be relevant to the application being sought.”
The judge said he was prepared to dismiss the case and wanted Mr. Hoyte compensated for lost wages.
“Your honor,” Mr. Wang said, “I’m personally not willing to compensate him.”
No, the judge said; he meant that the law firm, Pressler & Pressler — one of the biggest in the collection industry — should pay the $115. He would hold a sanctions hearing, a formal process of penalizing the law firm for suing the wrong man.
Under questioning by the judge, Mr. Hoyte recounted being called about the debt, providing his Social Security number and date of birth, and being summoned to court anyhow.
The collections lawyer then began to interrogate Mr. Hoyte.
“You claim you told Pressler & Pressler it wasn’t you,” Mr. Wang said to Mr. Hoyte. “Did you send them proof, as in a copy of your Social Security number with only the last four digits visible?”
“No,” Mr. Hoyte said. “They didn’t ask for it.”
“But you didn’t send any written proof of the claim that it was not you?” Mr. Wang said.
“I told them on the phone it’s not me,” Mr. Hoyte said.
Mr. Wang appeared outraged.
“So without any written proof that it’s not you, you would expect someone just, you know, to go on say-so?” he demanded. “Is that correct?”
Alice had reached Wonderland: The lawyer who had sued the wrong man was blaming the wrong man for getting sued.
Judge Dear cut off the questioning. He told Mr. Wang and Mr. Hoyte to come back to court in January.
“If, somehow, counsel, you decide that you’re going to compensate him for his time off,” Judge Dear said, “I will reconsider sanctions.”
y’yasher kochacha, Judge Dear. may you go mai-chayil l’chayil. but are you not going too softly. if the defendant was guilty, he would be hit with other charges as well. how about hitting the firm with 10 times punitive damages, a letter of apology, and reimbursement of travel expenses?
Keep on Noach, we need judges like you, Hatzlachs Raba
He’s 100% right if they target a wrong man they should be obligated to pay him for lost wages
He’s 100% right if they target a wrong man they should be obligated to pay him for lost wages
Well done Judge Dear . Sanity and fairness to the courtroom. Next time carfare and other damages.
About time they get these colloction agencies.
Judge Dear keep up the good work.
Judge dear a true mentch
thank you Mr Noach Dear or honorable Judge Dear.
i deal in the finance line and as all know credit in good shape is a prerequisite for obtaining any type of loan.
often time i have come across people who have been hounded by the collection firm mentioned in the article.
they freeze bank accounts and track down anything that is remotely connected to the person they are chasing. (guilty by association,if youre name is connected the account is frozen)
the worst part is You Cant Deal With Them.
they will not cooperate or work with anybody, they are a nightmare. obnoxous and putting the onus on you to prove its not you .like do you have a police report that your credit card was stolen in 1993. hello its almost 2010. do you have proof that i am the one who owes the money? and they say to bad, see you in court.
but i have succeeeded in beating them at their own game in ingenious ways.
on behalf of my clients, i am proud of it.
and i wish all who fight their aggressive behavior and tactics to win to win and to win some more.
Well done Judge Dear – what is amazing is that the lawyer Wang could demand of Hoyte that it was his responsibility to send in written proof – what they are doing is harrassment and Dear should awardmore than $115 damages. They are like a bunch of robber barons
Although attorney Wang tried to wiggle his law firm out of sanctions cleverly, I believe Noach Dear is 100% correct.
Once someone tells a law firm that ” it is not me” the burden should switch to the law firm to re-check to see whether they in fact got it wrong.
I also think that if the law firm cannot show due diligence on their part in locating the proper defendant, they should be penalized and pay Mr. Hoyte his lost wages.
(Sanctions might be pushing it though.)
I myself a,d many people I know have been harassed by the agency mentioned.They drag you down to court with threats of arrest and garnish your paycheck and freeze your bank account. I have no idea why its legal waht they do but somehow it is. If the previous poster who mentioned working against them can post some contact information it would be greatly appreciated and helpful to many
I myself a,d many people I know have been harassed by the agency mentioned.They drag you down to court with threats of arrest and garnish your paycheck and freeze your bank account. I have no idea why its legal waht they do but somehow it is. If the previous poster who mentioned working against them can post some contact information it would be greatly appreciated and helpful to many
One more point. It is my belief that Pressler should be obligated to pay both for Lost wages and they should be obligated to fix Mr. Hoyte’s credit if they bamboozeled it.
Sanctions on the other hand is a bit extreme and should only be imposed in the event Judge Dear can ascertain that the law firm was guilty of GROSS Negligence.
The collections lawyer then began to interrogate Mr. Hoyte. “You claim you told Pressler & Pressler it wasn’t you,” Mr. Wang said to Mr. Hoyte. “Did you send them proof, as in a copy of your Social Security number with only the last four digits visible?”
Am I rseeing good?
The companý has to bring proof that he is the right mr. Hoyte not the other way around, why does he have to waste another day in court?
Mr. Hoyte should get more than a days wages in compensation, and why should he have to come back to court in Jan. and waste another day? He should sue the collection agency and their lawyers.
I was personally “attacked” by a collection agency for a huge loan that someone apparently had taken on a name the same name as me but with a different initial. Only after calling a nice # of times did they finally stop hounding us.
This is the good guy the good voters of BP voted out of office. Fortunately for Judge Dear and the people he is helping, America is a land of second acts. It’s just a shame the people who should know better weren’t a bit more appreciative when it counted.
I think he is 100% right but why did he call him back again??! He will lose 115 more dollars now… He should’ve made them pay for their mistaske right of way
Is there anyway we could see Judge Dear in City Council again?
Wow is this article misleading!! All of u think that deer is so right in what he’s doing?? I personally had many run ins with him in doing collection. I personally went after debtors who decided they can afford to walk in to circuit city and buy a flat screen tv for every room in there house and whatu know they default on there credit card they used. Dyu not think they should pay what they spent when try couldn’t afford? Yes this article is about a firm seeming abusive in trying to collect from the wrong person. But I’ve personally had cases were the debtor admitted to owing the debt and deer looked for any way possible to thwart our efforts in trying to collect a debt that was rightfully owed to us and yes it was the right person with the right social and date of birth. All deer does is show debtors it is ok to walk in to best buy and spend 10 thousand dollars on there credit card with no way of being able to pay. Thts all he does. So now these debtors leave court and see that what they did was fine casue they got away with it in court so they will go buy a few more tvs without anyway to pay back the credit card they use because hey, when they come in to court on judgment day they know that deer will be sitting at the helm and will just give them a free pass for all the debt they ammased. And then guess what, they will keep on doing it. It’s because of people loke deer that America is messed up and in a disaster of a recession. It’s because of people like deer that people will never get out of debt. We need a judge who will make poeple realize that it’s not ok tonspend money u don’t have. So deer u don’t do them a service by absolving them of there debt, u do them a diservice because they will never stop as long as u sit there and let them get away with the 6 free hdtvs they just got for free. So thanku deer for being an unfair judge. The tora tells u to be a fair one. But ur not even close. And by the way were coming after u and were gonna take ur judgeship from u because ur anything but a fair judge.
There are already collection related laws in place that do protect the consumer to some degree. The consumer has the legal right to demand and get proof from any collection agency of the agencies right to collect the debt and copies of documents that the accused may have signed obligating themselves to that debt. If the collection agency cannot pony up those papers the debt is then not valid. There are also time limits in place on the collection agencies ability to collect debts and once those limits have passed the debt no longer is valid. Since most folks are now on the internet the information is at hand as to what the law allows and does not …it is a matter of fighting for one’s own rights and finding out where that information is. There is a site run by Asa Aaron’s of NBC channel 4 fame in NYC that gives such vital help. When his articles where published in the NY Daily News this subject was addressed and very important facts about collection laws were discussed. As for Judge Dear’s ruling…I think that penalties should have been imposed on the collection law firm and that bringing both parties back will only result in more financial hardship on the victim Mr. Hoyte.
How about compensation for mental anguish and harassment? throw the book at these parasites!
They should also give him a written letter so that if , in future, he would want to apply for a credit card, his credit rating would not be ruined!!