SACOR Financial , Inc. is a third-party collection agency and debt purchaser based in California. SACOR has received consumer complaints alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), such as attempting to collect debts not owed and threatening to take actions that cannot legally be taken. If SACOR has contacted you about past due financial obligations, make sure you understand your rights before you take action.
The harassing company pays our fees.
They’re legit. According to the Better Business Bureau (BBB), Sacor Financial, Inc. was founded and incorporated in August 2010. The BBB established a profile page for SACOR in December 2010. The BBB lists SACOR as a collection agency. Buzzfile estimates SACOR’s annual revenue at $1.9 million and the size of its headquarters staff at 9 employees.
According to its website, SACOR “helps organizations recover delinquent consumer debt two ways”—by purchasing charged-off accounts from businesses to “immediately impact… their bottom line by offering them cash for these nonproductive accounts”; and through SACOR’s “nationwide and international collection service.”
SACOR services delinquent debts for a variety of businesses and industries, including bankcards and loans; consumer retail lenders; credit card lenders; private label credit card accounts; automotive and RV lenders; and rent and damage claims from residential lease and rental properties.
SACOR provides “both people and technology solutions that maximize …recoveries.” SACOR utilizes a “unique approach to reducing the cost per dollar collected while still creating a positive customer experience.” SACOR employs a multi-lingual collection staff; “several convenient customer payment options”; “customized letters and report formats”; and “state-of-the-art technology with in-house programmers.” SACOR offers collection services within the United States and worldwide.
SACOR states that its collection staff undergo “comprehensive compliance training in FDCPA, HIPAA, and all state rules and regulations.” They also state that they maintain a policy of “strict adherence to collection law and privacy procedures.” Their website provides links to the free annual credit report website, as well as resources for financial literacy and id theft prevention. However, there are no links to collections industry-related consumer protection resources, laws, or enforcement agencies.
Who are we? We are Lemberg Law, a Consumer Law Firm
Lemberg Law is a consumer law firm helping victims of collection harassment and abuse. We are ranked A+ by the BBB. We’ve helped more than 15,000 consumers stop harassment and recover money from debt collectors. Harassed? Abused? Misled by a collector? Call our Helpline today! There is no charge unless we win.
As of August 2019, the BBB has closed 5 complaints against SACOR Financial Inc in the past three years, with 2 complaints closed in the previous 12 months. Three of those complaints alleged problems with billing and collections; the other 2 complaints cited problems with customer service.As of July 2015, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) has closed 12 complaints involving SACOR. Justia lists at least 6 cases of civil litigation involving SACOR.
Sacor Financial, Inc.
1911 Douglas Blvd., Ste. 85-126
Roseville, CA 95661
Telephone:(866) 556-0231
Website: http://www.sacor.net/
It is illegal for a debt collector to make empty threats to sue you or garnish your wages. It is also unlikely SACOR would sue you for a debt you may not owe or they cannot validate. However, debt collection agencies are known to have summoned debtors to court and garnish wages after a default judgement. Contacting an attorney BEFORE this could possibly happen would be a smart move. We’ve helped thousands of consumers fight back against unscrupulous debt collection harassers. Find out if we can help you too today!
Get Free BBB A+ Attorney. Call 475-277-1600 NOW
Unlawful Debt Harassment? Learn the Law & Sue the Collector.
Absolutely. Here are some Sample Complaints
In May 2016, in the Court of Appeals of Georgia, a judge issued a decision in a case alleging SACOR Financial Inc had committed several procedural and statuary violations in their effort to collect a delinquent credit card debt. In this case, the plaintiff in 2006 had opened a credit card with a consumer electronics store and, according to SACOR, “proceeded to make charges on the account for an extended period of time.” The plaintiff had not made every payment on his credit card, and at some point, the account went into default. Subsequently, in 2012, SACOR filed a two-paragraph complaint against the plaintiff, stating that he owed over $16,000 plus interest on the account. A year later, SACOR “filed an affidavit that service of process had been effected upon” the plaintiff. And in 2015, SACOR filed a motion for summary judgement against the plaintiff. In this complaint, SACOR stated that the plaintiff’s failure to have made all of his monthly payments on time when he had an active account with the electronics retail store constituted a breach of contract, and that therefore the account was in default and charged off. SACOR’s motion stated that they had acquired all rights, title, and interest to the debt after purchasing it from the original creditor; and that now the plaintiff was responsible for paying the $16,000 balance, plus interest at 26% per year for the intervening period, which amounted to an additional $16,000; as well as court costs of $178.00.
At the initial hearing, the plaintiff argued that the debt originated in 2006. Because the statute of limitations on SACOR’s breach of contract claim was limited to either 4 or 6 years, SACOR was time-barred from collecting the debt. However, three days after the plaintiff filed his response, the trial court entered a decision in favor of SACOR, and the plaintiff was held liable for the $16,000 balance; $16,000 in interest; and $178.00 in court costs.
At the appeals hearing in 2016, the plaintiff argued that the trial court had erred in issuing its decision, again arguing that after the statute of limitation expires, neither the original creditor nor any collection agency or debt purchaser has the right to pursue a breach of contract claim. The court stated that SACOR had failed to submit any evidence showing that the debt they had purchased had any contractual connection with either the electronics retailer or the bank that had issued the credit card. The court also stated the statute of limitations for a breach of contract claim is 6 years; furthermore, SACOR only offered as evidence of breach that the plaintiff had missed some payments when the account was active, without indicating any precise date when the actual breach occurred. Thus, because the most recent statement submitted by SACOR was from May 2006, this date was used to determine the beginning of the period of limitation.
SACOR Financial Inc attempted to argue that the six-year period did not begin until they acquired the debt in 2012, but the court stated that the law specifically states that third parties who acquire debt assume the same restrictions and limitations as the original creditor, so their argument that they had obtained a new limitations period along with the debt was not supported by law. They also attempted to argue that the plaintiff had failed to offer evidence in support of his claim that the debt was time-barred, but the curt stated that his argument was a matter of law rather than evidence. As a result, the appeals court reversed the trial court’s previous decision, and SACOR’s motion for judgement against the plaintiff was denied.
Federal laws protect you. The Fair Debt Collections Practices Act (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).
But here’s the rub: If you want to enforce your rights, or recover money for violations — you need to sue. These laws provide individuals like you 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.
You may have a case, if…
“With your help the nagging collection calls have ceased! I was thrilled I was also able to get damages from the collection agency. I am unable to adequately express my joy. I am so thankful I made the call.”
“I would recommend your company to anyone. You have the debt collectors off my back, and I will finally see the light at the end of the tunnel. Throughout the entire procedure your employees were courteous and professional. I was blown away by their efficacy also.
“After speaking to one of the partners, and going over the plan of action, I felt I’d chose the perfect company to go to work for me. He was very accommodating in describing what was going to happen. I would strongly recommend Lemberg Law to anybody being hassled by debt collectors”
“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!”
We can absolutely help. Call us today.
Share your story
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.
Sergei Lemberg is an attorney focusing on consumer law, class actions related to automotive issues, and personal injury litigation. With nearly two decades of experience, his areas of practice include Lemon Law (vehicle defects), Debt Collection Harassment, TCPA (illegal robocalls and texts), Fair Credit Reporting Act, Overtime claims, Personal Injury cases, and Class Actions. He has consistently been recognized as the nation's "most active consumer attorney." In 2020, Mr. Lemberg represented Noah Duguid before the United States Supreme Court in the landmark case Duguid v. Facebook. He is also the author of "Defanging Debt Collectors," a guide that empowers consumers to fight back against debt collectors and prevail, as well as "Lemon Law 101: The Laws That Lemon Dealers Don't Want You to Know."
See more posts from Sergei Lemberg
