Self-Directed Debt Settlement Software Cuts Fees Significantly to Settle Debts

Dave VanderVeer has developed a consumer self-directed debt settlement approach. I had the pleasure of discussing his approach and software with him. You can hear the full interview below.

As Dave observed, consumers are getting bombarded by many debt settlement companies making false promises and charging high fees upfront for services they may never deliver.

Using the SelfDirectedDebtSettlement.com approach the consumer can create a repayment plan that will debit their bank account and deposit the money in the consumer’s escrow account. Once funds are available to settle the account the consumer can direct the creditor to be paid.

Dave has some concerns over products like ESP Software that blur the line and seem non-compliant with proposed legislation that limits the fees and services of debt settlement companies.

I think you’ll find the approach new and the interview is worth your time if you want to learn more about how the system works and how everyone makes money and get paid.

Currently they are charging an enrollment fee of $199 and then 5% of their debt, this will most likely change shortly to be a $50.00 enrollment fee and 10% of the amount people SAVE using the program – to comply with the new law.

Damon Day - Pro Debt Coach

Follow Me
Steve Rhode is the Get Out of Debt Guy and has been helping good people with bad debt problems since 1994. You can learn more about Steve, here.
Steve Rhode
Follow Me
Latest posts by Steve Rhode (see all)
See also  Meracord / NoteWorld Still Taking a Beating Over Debt Relief Activities. Drags Many In.

10 thoughts on “Self-Directed Debt Settlement Software Cuts Fees Significantly to Settle Debts”

    • I purchased a SEDS Self Enrollment Debt System from self logix about 2 months ago it has def made my sales guys life easier. what ive seen is the clients are impressed with thwe abilty to choose there own pay back terms. we have seen an increase on clients choosing a fater bay back term vs sales angent s streching out it to the max not explaining they have more options. we have seen an increase on the amoutn of client whom have lump sums they would rather throw back at there debt. We like it.

    • Under the new FTC Rules Debt Settlements companies who solicit consumers via telemarketing campaigns will no longer be able to charge any fees until they provide a service unless the consumer enrolls themselves online. This ftc law also also addressed inbound calls from consumers who respond to advertisement via various mediums to include television and live transfers and internet leads. In general if the communication is telephonic, debt settlement and debt reduction companies are covered in this new FTC ruling. The FTC also mandates debt settlement providers provide consumers with disclosures to allow consumers to make an educated decision as to whether or not to sign up for a particular service. Debt Settlement Providers are now prohibited from taking any fees until they successfully negotiate an arrangement and the consumer has made at least one payment towards the said agreement. In addition the provider cannot take all of their fees if more than one account is enrolled in the program, but may only charge fees proportionate to the total enrolled debt at the time of enrollment. Our owners decided to funnel all of our bussiness through self logixs do it yourself debt system to keep kosher with ftc after oct 27th 2010. the self logix consumer do it yourself debt enrollment has hindered some of our elderly clients. we have no choice but to conform with offering this option to keep going. any questions me. our do it yourself debt system is running great with no issues and no issues with lhdr our back end.

    • We started using s Self Enrollment Debt System about 2 months ago. We found that converting internet leads are much easier using this system. Our sales agent are direct all there leads to our system. So far so good. Accoring to our attorney if the consumer is choosing there own payments and enrolling themselves we are safe from the wrath of the ftc. We opted with Self Logix because they dont take any percentage from us or the cnsumers unlike the other self enrollment debt systems on the market. We are happy with there support and training.

      • I’m not sure I’d necessarily agree with your attorney. Although the FTC did not add the term “product” to services, I wouldn’t want to take the chance (even if my attorney told me they’d pick up all the defense cost and fines). It seems pretty clear(I’m sure there are other aspect of your business that will easily qualify the company to fall under the rules, but I specifically wanted to address “product” only).. No question Michael Kerr had concern, and after listening to the interview I might say he’s justified in saying “I told you so” if he’d like. I do have to say that if the industry put half as much energy and effort into complying and oversight as they do in trying to find a “work around”, the industry would have cleaned itself up some years ago.

        3. Coverage of Products

        Some commenters recommended that the Commission add the term “products” to the term“debt relief services” to ensure that providers cannot evade the Rule by selling books, CDs, or other tangible materials promising debt relief, or by including such products as part of the service.

        Another commenter disagreed, stating that products should be excluded from the definition. This commenter noted that a consumer who purchases a product (e.g., a book) intended to help relieve debt is himself responsible for taking the steps stated therein; in contrast, an individual who purchases a service is paying the seller to provide that service.140

        The Commission declines to modify the Rule to include products in the definition of debt relief services. The Rule is targeted at practices that take place in the provision of services, and the record does not indicate that deceptive or abusive practices in the sale of products, such as books or other goods containing information or advice, are common. This limitation, however, should not be used to circumvent the rule by calling a service – in which the provider undertakes certain actions to provide assistance to the purchaser – a “product.” Nor can a provider evade the rule by including a “product,” such as educational material on how to manage debt, as part of the service it offers.

        The Commission further notes that deceptive or abusive practices in the telemarketing of products already are prohibited by the TSR and/or the FTC Act. Therefore, the Final Rule does not add the term “product” to the definition of “debt relief services.”

        139 CFA at 7; ULC (Kerr), Tr. at 258; AFSA (Sheeran), Tr. at 259-60; FDR (Linderman), Tr. at 256 (for products that are sold with a guarantee).

        140 Centricity (Manganiello), Tr. at 239; see also MP at 3 (stating that expanding the definition to products is “completely unnecessary,” as “the FTC already has adequate authority to deal with deceptive marketing of such products.” The commenter also stated that “where the true intention of the product offering is to ‘up-sell’ consumers to a full-service debt program, then the proposed rule change would already govern.”).

          • John,

            I wanted to make sure I understood the issue fully so I sent your comment to the FTC for clarification. Here is what attorney Allison Brown from the FTC said in response.

            “There’s no exemption from the TSR for attorneys who engage in telemarketing, and if the sale is made over the phone, there is no exception for online enrollment. In addition, the Federal Trade Commission Act’s prohibition on unfair and deceptive practices applies to all transactions.”

            Can you help me to understand why you believe differently?


  1. So if ESP changed their existing fee and made it “self directed” wouldn’t they be an equivalent service to selfdirectsettlement.com?


    • If they got rid of all the other products and services that are attached to ESP, and the company selling ESP actually had the authority to conduct business, then probably yes.



Leave a Comment