SSN Overlap With Micronesia Causes Trouble For Woman 494
stevel writes "Holly Ramer, who lives in Concord, NH, has never been to the Federated States of Micronesia, but debt collectors dun her mercilessly for unpaid loans taken out by a small business owner in that Pacific island nation. Why? Micronesia and other countries in the region have their own Social Security Administrations which gave out numbers to residents applying for US disaster relief loans. The catch is that the Micronesian SSNs have fewer digits than the nine-digit US version, and when credit bureaus entered these into their database, they padded them out with zeros on the front. These numbers then matched innocent US citizens with SSNs beginning with zeroes, as many in northern New England do. The credit bureaus say to call the Social Security Administration, the SSA says call the credit bureaus, the FTC says they can't help, and nobody is taking responsibility for the confusion."
what i would say (Score:1, Insightful)
Idiot programmers (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:I would like to have universal health care but (Score:1, Insightful)
I don't know. The government has been running our K-12 public education system so effectively, if we trust the government with our childrens futures we can trust them with our health.
Re:what i would say (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:what i would say (Score:5, Insightful)
Instead of insulting a poor call-center rep
"poor call-center rep"? They are all scumbags. Go watch the movie 'In Debt We Trust'. Go read collections 101 [scottgeiger.com] and learn how they are trained. They are all miserable lying bastards who are willing to break the law in order to collect a quick buck. They don't deserve an ounce of sympathy and if they make the mistake of calling me they are going to hear every four letter word in the English language.
Re:what i would say (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:a little metadata (Score:4, Insightful)
looks like the data (ssn) needs a little metadata (issuing authority, distinguished name) in order to make it work.
Or, as I've questioned previously [slashdot.org] on here, WTF are the credit rating agencies in the US using non-unique identifiers (and identifiers that shouldn't be used outside a social security scenario) when (usually the exact same) credit agencies in other countries can manage using other (available) data? (Name, DOB, (Previous and current) Address?)
For example in the UK, the equivalent to the SSN is the National Insurance (NI) number - this is never used by the CRAs - only by HMRC (tax office.)
Anyway, sure, they still get false positives using these details (the most common seems to be when they use the name only), but not quite on this sort of scale.
Re:Simple solution for SSN (Score:3, Insightful)
The SSA simply needs to announce that from next January, all new SSNs issued will be 22+ digits long and will be identical for the first or last 9 digits. They wouldn't have to do it, but it would force lots of places to plan for a future change. They could also start putting in a checksum on some new cards or throwing in letters. Remember the common mod 10 checksum used for things like credit cards was designed to work with EBCDIC letters.
OK, first I'll comment in saying that I think you finally found a use for IPv6 address space...Nice one.
Unfortunately, this number "reform" pretty much all becomes a fucking mute point unless we have some REAL SSA reform to go along with it.
Sorry if it seems I'm a little bitter. I'm due to collect SS the very year they're due to be broke, fuck you very much.
Re:what i would say (Score:5, Insightful)
One time a lawyer left a long message on the machine for them trying to get them to call her before court the following day (where I assume she got a default judgement, since I doubt they knew or cared about it). I was sorely tempted to either call her and either (a) imitate them and call her nasty names, or (b) ask to join her lawsuit for the time I've spent dealing with their many collection calls.
The automated ones are the worst. If you ignore them they just keep calling. So I have to spend time calling them and carefully explaining how someone can actually move to a new residence. It can take a while for them to understand that concept.
Re:what i would say (Score:3, Insightful)
Brandishing a firearm on your own property = absolutely nothing in almost every state in the Union.
Actually firing that weapon at someone in much of anything other than the defense of your life = murder or attempted murder. You haven't the right to respond to misdemeanors with deadly force.
Brandishing a firearm in any situation where you don't intend to fire = Darwin award candidate. Whoever you pointed it at has a legitimate fear for his life. If he isn't knowingly engaged in a crime at the time, he can legally kill you in self defense. Even on your own property.
Re:what i would say (Score:1, Insightful)
It works for the cops...
Re:what i would say (Score:2, Insightful)
"Oh, and in case you weren't aware, any weapon you have is several times more likely to be used AGAINST you in a crime than BY you to prevent one. Good luck, and happy hunting."
Spoken like a true anti-gun nut, Got a link to that study? I doubt it exists.
I won't even bother to explain about the sanctity of the home and the concepts of self defense, you wont bother to listen.
Oh, And Good Luck getting the burglar or rapist to wait while you call the cops and wait for them to arrive.
Re:Social Security #s are for Social Security ONLY (Score:3, Insightful)
Not using debt doesn't help when the idiots are assigning someone else's debt to you...
Re:Social Security #s are for Social Security ONLY (Score:3, Insightful)
The "credit" required to buy a house or even a new car is a lot less than the credit needed to buy a new computer system or household appliances. Collateral worth repossessing means a lot more to creditors than your credit score. Credit score is is just a way to justify the excessive interest rates they want to apply. Buying real estate is easy. As for buying a new car? What are you thinking?! But I will say that saving up $20k or so becomes fairly easy once the saving habit is formed. Once you stop being tempted to buy crap you just don't need, you will find that you have lots more money than you've ever had in your pockets.
You are pretty well invested into the mythology of the credit game. It's time you spoke with your grandparents about how things used to be before this game was created and learn why they always had big savings accounts and other interest bearing accounts. It was no accident. It was the way things were done. Now days, people don't save at all. Having a couple thousand dollars in an account is pretty rare for most people. It's actually rather tragic. Nearly everyone lives in debt.
Re:what i would say (Score:1, Insightful)
So if you pirate a song or movie the RIAA/MPAA should be allowed to come to your house and shoot you?
Re:what i would say (Score:2, Insightful)
What are you going to do if you "brandish" it and they call your bluff and still refuse to leave? Worse yet, what are you going to do if they make a grab for it? Shoot them? Have fun explaining to the jury why you escalated the situation to one of life and death when your life wasn't in danger to begin with.
My life was in danger when they attempted to grab it. If they manage to take it from me, there is little chance that they won't kill me or at least threaten to. Why else would they need my gun? If they don't have hostile intentions the most peaceful way for them to defuse the situation is to leave. If I shoot to maim, it doesn't give them that chance.
I'm as pro-gun as they come but if I was on your jury I'd convict your ass in a heartbeat if that was the way it went down.
Legal ramifications are not going to be a high priority at the time. Convict if you must, it's better than the alternative for me.
Re:what i would say (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:what i would say (Score:5, Insightful)
Yep, let the legal system deal with it. The worst a debt collector can do is take you to court only to find out they screwed up. You may counter sue at this point depending on the laws of your nation.
Forceful? Terrible idea. When it goes to court they get to say that you were the belligerent party and their side was "only defending itself". You're better off calling the cops to have them escorted off. First rule of dealing with debt collectors is to let them make the mistakes.
Their only recourse is to sue you and the onus is on the debt collector to prove you owe them money. All you need to do is prove that you are not who they say you are. Never get intimidated, in Australia a debt collector is not permitted to threaten or deceive in any communications as this would result in the revocation of their license and probably charges being made against the companies directors.
Re:what i would say (Score:4, Insightful)
Best lawyer wins. A good lawyer can prove anything they need to.
Using force only helps them convince others you are guilty of something.
Re:what i would say (Score:3, Insightful)
I hope you don't have children who sleep in another room. I would hate to think of the awful things that could happen while you staying put waiting for a police department that has no obligation to protect you to show up. Before we get to far, the no obligation part is a result of a court case that exonerated cops for not protecting someone as the court found the cops has no obligation to protect anyone. Anyways, the point is that it could take a long time before they show up. It might be a priority for them, but if something happened across town or something, there could be some significant time involved before they can make it to your home.
IF you don't have kids or someone sleeping in another room, then it sounds like a pretty good plan. However, if you do, I would go after the invader if nothing else but to keep them away from the other people.
Re:what i would say (Score:5, Insightful)
To stop him stealing it. Beacause it's my fucking car, that I bought with my fucking money that I fucking earned.
There's plenty of good info here. (Score:5, Insightful)
If you have enough sense to browse the comments, you'll find common themes:
1. The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act is pretty effective at helping you deal with collectors, so go read the law.
2. You can usually get a good response by writing a letter (and you'll see why if you read the law). At the minimum you can make them comply with a "do not call me" request and make them correspond by letter.
I will add a bit of my own wisdom. Find out the laws in your state and record your telephone. I happen to be in a "one party knows" state, so I can record my calls without saying. I always ask the state the collector is in and look it up to see if it is compatible (otherwise you may need to inform them if you want to use the recordings in court).
Review your telephone recordings. Sometimes collectors will say things that don't mean quite what you think when you are on the line and under stress. I found reviewing the recordings left me with "ah ha" moments, especially when I took the conversation in the context of the FDCPA.
Despite some other commentor's opinions it was my experience that debt collectors are often professional thugs. It makes sense, thugs have to work somewhere too, and you do what you are good at.
If you have to pay a collector (I owed for a legitimate claim one time when there was a billing mistake), I recommend a one-time use credit card number. It can't be double billed if you set a limit at the correct amount. Believe me, you don't want to try to collect from a collector who owes you money because they screwed up. You can be successful, but you won't enjoy it.
Remember, you want to be polite but firm. You want your recorded voice (remember, you're going to be taping this) to sound reasonable. If you take this collector to court, you want them to be the asshole. You want the judge to get pissed on your behalf and zing them with a judgment.
Re:And when you can't get a loan? (Score:3, Insightful)
In a libertarian system there'd be no need to sue them for defamation, the wronged party could just go round and kick their fucking heads in.
True enough, but wronged party would probably just say "fuck it!" long before he got the road built even halfway to his offender's place.
Re:The real problem (Score:1, Insightful)
The formula for calculating your credit score is not logical. Your credit score should not depend on how much interest you have paid over the years to creditors. People with the highest credit scores have paid more in interest and other unneeded fees than people who have not relied on credit. People who do not utilize credit have a score of 0. People who do not utilize credit should have the highest credit score because these people are the most financially stable. Credit is an arrangement for deferred payment for goods and services. Financially stable people do not need to defer payments.