"Call me, call …" - the words from the once popular song performed by Zhanna Rozhdestvenskaya are unlikely to please those who suddenly became the object of increased attention of the bank, wishing to return a cash or mortgage loan. Moreover, through regular telephone reminders. After all, the debtor turns out not to be the one whose phone was "cut off" by the employees of the collection agency cooperating with the bank, but a relative who refuses to pay.
Why do they call
When concluding an agreement, employees of the credit department in advance, including by phone, try to find out everything that will help them find a client even in the event of a force majeure. This includes passport details, home address, place of work, mobile and home phone numbers, as well as addresses and phone numbers of guarantors and even relatives. Clients themselves, wanting to get a loan at any cost, willingly meet halfway.
In a word, the bank is practically delegated the right to look for a debtor, if necessary, regularly calling his household and provoking them into family scandals in order to make them pay. What a financial institution willingly and uses, eventually transferring all the information necessary for the search for a defaulter to a collection agency.
Who can I call
Any standard agreement says about the right of the bank to share information about the debtor with third parties. Typically, these are collection agencies that specialize in debt collection. Such a clause gives the agency the right to methodically call not only the relatives of the dishonest creditor, but also colleagues.
Persistent calls to relatives who are not guarantors do not contradict the law either. But they also do not have legal force, so it is unnecessary to be afraid of them. This is nothing more than an attempt to find a debtor with the help of loved ones. And if the latter want to help the bank restore justice, they can do it; there is no such desire - it is permissible to ask not to disturb and turn off the phone.
Moreover, calls to a relative of the debtor, recorded in the contract by the surety, are not considered a violation. Taking responsibility for the possible actions of the borrower, the guarantor is obliged to understand his serious risk. After all, his brother or son may well go broke or lose his job. And at the same time the ability to pay off a loan or mortgage. Therefore, having heard the voice of a bank or agency representative in the receiver, it makes no sense for the guarantor to naively assert that he "did not understand anything."
The latter is permissible if personal data suddenly appeared in the contract without a handwritten signature. But this is extremely unlikely, since presence during the conclusion of the contract is considered a prerequisite and is strictly observed.
The transfer of debt obligations by inheritance is quite common. In the event of, for example, the death of a bank client. But when calling the heir, creditors are obliged to take into account that he has the right not to know about the debts of a deceased relative. It should be borne in mind that an official dialogue on the problem of inheritance, albeit a telephone one, is allowed to be conducted only six months after the death of the person who was the second party to the banking agreement. But, in general, such issues are usually resolved not by calls, but exclusively in court.
What should I say
A mistake and even an official misconduct (disclosing bank secrets) can be a too frank telephone story of a bank employee about the conclusion of an agreement. Moreover, about the amount of debt. The maximum that he has the right to do is politely ask the debtor to transfer a request to call the credit department. Another thing is that in practice everything happens a little differently. But collectors are not bound by such ethical standards, which they willingly use.
The most immoral and unlawful is the demand from a stranger to pay a debt to him on the basis of only the fact that the debtor is a member of his family. Especially in an ultimatum or offensive form. In the language of criminal law, this is called extortion and is even punishable by imprisonment. If, of course, this can be proved in court.
How to react
Are you absolutely sure that the bank is violating the rules of "fair play"? Are the words that you do not know where the relative lives now, and you do not have his phone number, are they not accepted? You can try to stop such unpleasant communication. For example, don't answer calls. Or, on the contrary, visit the office of a bank or agency, from where they are regularly distributed, and try to explain that you are absolutely incapable of helping them find a relative. You can even write a complaint to the Central Bank. Another option is to offer the agency to send all the necessary documents by mail or go to court.
A more aggressive way to suppress the "telephone terrorism" of a bank or, which happens much more often, agencies, by contacting the police, is also considered effective. They say that they do not just regularly call you, but actually have a serious psychological impact, demanding the impossible. Yes, they simply interfere with a quiet life.
