NCO Agrees to Settle Chase Bank Account. Chase Backs Out of Deal.

Angelo Anzalone, president of Active Debt Solutions, has asked me to bring to your attention an issue with Chase Bank and NCO that concerns him regarding the backing out of a settlement agreement with Chase Bank USA.

Anzalone states, “We reached a settlement agreement with NCO on a Chase account.

The terms were as followed:
$1,300 on June 30th
$25 July 30
$25 on Aug 30th.

NCO took the first payment of $1,300 but didn’t take the 2nd or 3rd. When we called NCO to find out why they never took the 2nd payment and we were told that Chase pulled the account back and they would not honor the settlement even though we have a settlement letter and they took the first (majority of the settlement) payment.

Chase is now saying that they will not honor the settlement letter and that the payment of $1,300 was applied to the balance.

Next time someone complains about consumers suing collection agencies remind them of tactics like this one. This is not the first time that NCO has done this either. ”

Do You Have a Question You'd Like Help With? Contact Debt Coach Damon Day. Click here to reach Damon.

Here is the backup supplied on this event.

Is This Something You’ve Seen Happen as Well?

Please post your comments below to help Active Debt and this consumer if you have any feedback on this or other similar situations.

Damon Day - Pro Debt Coach

I can always use your help. If you have a tip or information you want to share, you can get it to me confidentially if you click here.

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  I'm in Debt and Talked to CCCS and They Said They Could Not Help Me. - Ray

57 thoughts on “NCO Agrees to Settle Chase Bank Account. Chase Backs Out of Deal.”

  1. This is great post. Abandon all monthly service charges a Chase Premier Checking Account, the Bank also providers and payroll services. Line of credit, deposit and credit card is only designed for the enterprise certificate from Chase.

  2. Oh my gosh this is wrong on so many levels I don’t know where to begin.  When you get a letter like this, GET IT CONFIRMED BY THE HOLDER!  You don’t have d–k unless you have it from Chase!  I feel like I’m taking crazy pills!  No debt settlement company bothers to do this simple thing, and I know many disagree with me, but I believe they know they’re doing it and don’t care.  The alternative is that they are complete and total morons. No, they are stuck to the bottom of morons’ shoes.  C’mon people, wake up!

    • I feel I did not get my point across with enough enthusiasm.  NCO never intended to see this deal through, that’s why it was structured this way in the first place.  And what kind of idiot did not see this coming?  $1300, then $25?  Seriously?  Why not just front $50 and pay $1350 and get out in front of this obvious scam?  Why?  Because nobody really wanted to help this poor sap in the first place!  There are days when I just think you all deserve to be ripped off.

      • I am still completely attired in wonder and disgust.  With all the serenity I can marshal I implore you to see reason.  Please remove this post.  It proves the worst things about the intelligence of people on the Internet.  Please.

      • Errick, I’ve never actually commented about anything you have posted but, I think it’s about time I do. First off, I really don’t think you understand the business of debt settlement based on all the rants you post about proving to you clients of debt settlement firms actually complete the plan in full. It happens son…on a regular basis, come to my office in NY and I would be more than happy to prove that to you… again and again, I’m sure Angelo would too.

        2. What do you really know about NCO? Do you think their just a fly-by-night company willing to put it all on the line and involve Chase in a scam over a $ 4,400.consumer account? Not

        3. Did you actually take time to read the SIF? I think if you did and really understand the business you would know why ActiveDebt wanted this posted.

        4. Are you familiar with the many laws the collection industry must abide by? If you are then you would know that this case will be wrapped up in no time at all and everyone who posted here looking for a little notoriety will look foolish at best.

        Go get-umm boys and keep us posted!


        • The most interesting part of this issue for me is the NCO-Chase relationship. When NCO is collecting debts on behalf of Chase are they not acting as their agent and binding Chase or at the very least, binding NCO to stand behind the agreement?

          The NCO letter seems to pretty clearly say the letter verifies NCO and/or Chase (“we”) can accept the settlement and a meeting of the minds has taken place. Was the intent of NCO issuing such a letter to be deceptive and misleading, I doubt that. When NCO issued the letter they either had a basis for saying the settlement offer was fine or believed Chase accepted the offer.

          If Chase wants to back out and not honor the deal, well I guess that’s up to Chase but it seems to leave NCO on the hook for resolving this matter.

          I am not a lawyer but the letter from NCO, as an apparent agent for Chase, certainly appears to make a valid offer that was accepted for consideration. The consumer made or attempted to make the payments as agreed. And the funds on hand to settle were cleared funds held by a third-party escrow company. Verification of the funds has been provided. According to the letter/agreement, once all that occurred the the account would be reported as settled.

          For me the interesting part to follow is who eventually accepts responsibility for this issue, NCO or Chase.

          I’ll reach out to Chase and NCO today and ask them to comment on this article but don’t hold your breath they will.

          I again want to thank Angelo from Active Debt for bringing this to my attention and allowing me to publish the matter. This is a great way to deal with these interesting issues and when responsible minds come together and help, good things can happen.

        • Well maybe I deserve some scorn for losing my cool there.  And yes, by all means keep us posted.  But I stand by what I said, and I believe when we revisit this I will be shown to be right.  And I disagree that you never wrote a response to me.

          You are missing the most important words in the letter: “UPON CLEARANCE OF YOUR PAYMENTS, the account will be considered settled.”   This is what lawyers call a condition precedent, and it was not met.  Another cool lawyer word is good faith defense, which is all NCO needs to avoid all FDCPA or TIL an FCRA liability.  Failure ot meet an explicit condition precedent is a good faith defense, and sometimes even a winning defense.  And that is what we all call a loophole.  That’s what I know about NCO.

          But by all means, keep us posted.

          • I’m not sure i want to do this reply as I do not not want to get into a stupid debate. Some of the best advice I’ve ever got was when you fight a fool you look like a fool. In the end, I decided I did not want followers of this blog to be misinformed. Errick does not know what he is talking about. Not about conditions precedent, not about FDCPA, not about good faith defense. The SIF is valid and everyone who knows anything knows that. I don’t know that I agree with Mike in that it is a fall thru the cracks thing. Neither is it a scam by Chase/NCO. It is an example of poor systems and the manner in which accounts are transfered around all the time. The settlement could have been input incorrectly by NCO or any number of things could have happened. when this gets to the right people at Chase/NCO, they will resolve it. The battle is getting it to the right people. Sometimes that is the NCO or Chase lawyer. Any lawyer over there would tell thier client to honor the agreement. Steve’s point about agency is good one because that is precisely the problem. Sometimes NCO owns these things outright, sometimes they are just a collection agent. It is not always clear. What is clear is that a court would at least recognize them as an agent in this case. What this industry should be doing is banding together to get laws passed that require creditors and collectors to clearly state the relationship and the accounts so there is no confusion by the consumer. In this way consumers would know what and with whom they were settling. It is because of all these creditor shenanigans that consumers should be rep’d or at least coached so that when they settle an account they can rest assured that it settled and will not return.

          • Maybe I am talking out of my butt.  Looking forward to hearing of your successful resolution of this matter.

          • Errick,

            You’ve been an active poster on this site for quite a while now but one thing we don’t know is what your experience is inside the debt relief industry. I’m only asking so I can get some idea of the context in which to interpret your point of view.

            Do you manage a credit counseling group, are you a lawyer, maybe a consumer with experience in the area? What?

            Please tell us a little about yourself and experience. I think the more we can understand our various frames of reference the better we can learn from each other.


          • I will do that someday.  Until then I am just the guy who says things that are consistent with what is actually happening.  Believe them or not, I really didn’t care until yesterday, because I honestly believe this particular post is a no-brainer.

            Who cares why Chase won’t honor the settlement? Does it really matter? What matters is that there are simple steps to prevent this from happening and you didn’t take them.  You never take them, and your colleagues never take them.  You are free to disagree with me on the cause but you can’t argue with that.  I don’t have to be a particular person to be right about something so simple.

          • That’s very disappointing and certainly erodes your credibility. What reason would you possible have to not share your frame of reference inside debt relief?

          • I don’t really care how credible I seem to you.  I say things that fit the facts.  I say things that explain what everyone accepts.  This happens to clients all the time, it’s the first comment to this post.  I am explaining why.  It doesn’t matter who I am.  Ask Chase. Ask NCO. Demand answers, if you want to really help people.  Ask your friend at the FTC.

          • Errick,

            I’ve given you every opportunity to have a voice and a platform to say what you wanted. I simply ask you to share what credentials you have in this matter to put your experience in context, and you refuse.

            You’ve actually appeared to say a number of things that are not factual and I’m beginning to believe that you have no experience as a debt relief provider to provide authoritative feedback on matters like this.

            I asked you what your experience is inside the debt relief industry and you refuse to answer. i also asked, “So when you do settlements with NCO does Chase regularly provide you with a backup confirmation in these situations?” and you provided no answer.

            Back in my day we did some settlements. The situation here is not entirely rare. It happens sometimes but can be corrected. I’m confident that in this situation it will be also. The interest in this situation is an academic one for bonafide debt relief providers to provide feedback on.

            As I said, I’ve already asked NCO and Chase for a response but I’m not sure what asking the FTC has to do with anything here.

            So let me ask clearly, what experience do you have settling debts between NCO and Chase that provides specific information about this situation at hand? Is the answer, none? If so, just say so before you lose all credibility and make your voice and opinion, irrelevant.

          • I’m content to let my anonymous comments stand or fall on their own merit.  If I’m wrong, write an article explaining the truth, and let the readers decide.  If I have misstated a fact, correct it.  Why do you waste time with me if it is so obvious to everyone I am wrong?  Just ignore me then.

          • Errick, I never said you were wrong. What I said was that I had a different experience and others have said the same thing as well.

            I just asked you to put your experience into context to validate the advice you were giving. It’s a very reasonable request to help establish your level of expertise in these matters.

            As it stands it appears you’ve never settled a debt or at least a debt between NCO and Chase since you didn’t bother to answer my question.

          • @7af077e13098c09cc84bc0da790665d5:disqus      Because if ignored, consumers might mistake your rants for the truth and challenging you always reveals your lack of knowledge and experience in the industry.

          • Yes it’s true I ranted yesterday.  But at least I didn’t do what you did to this poor fellow.  You reaffirmed his debt and lost his money.  Yes you might get it back, and I hope you do.  But I still prefer being a ranter.

      • Sorry, I didn’t know your question was directed to me in particular.  Also I did not think it was serious.  Of course not, Chase won’t back up NCO because they disavow what NCO is doing.  Why is there an NCO in the first place?  Why else would Chase share the collection overhead with anyone?

        Pretend you’re a third party “asset management” company.  Try to sell your services to Chase.  What would you say?  That you sprinkle fairy dust and when the debtors sneeze you sneak in and steal their children?  No, you say you are willing to get dirty, get right to the line, take risks that a public company can’t take, to get the money.  What other value proposition can you come up with?

        Think for yourselves, people!  Don’t take my word or anyone’s.  Work it out in your own mind.  Go to NCO’s own website, where they say they can “unlock value” from seriously delinquent accounts.  What do you think that means?

        • Errick, it’s very simple. Chase is willing to pay contingency fees to collection agencies like NCO because they have crunched the numbers. They have calculated that aggregate recovery revenue will be higher if their internal collection costs are reduced by shifting the work to an agency operating on contingency. There is nothing more to it than that. The value proposition is that they can do it cheaper, that’s all.

          • Yes, seriously. You must be referring to the risk management operation that is associated with their investment banking and capital management operations, not credit card collections. Also, in case you are not aware of it, NCO has a call center in India. 🙂

      • Oh and by the way I went through the documents again just in case I did miss something important, and I did.  the $1300 was due on 6/30 and it didn’t leave Global until 7/1. It was LATE!

        • Not necessarily Errick, if it was a pay by phone
          transaction which is pretty common and free to customers of GCS, the funds
          could have been sitting in a special account ready for collection by NCO and
          just not acquired until the 1st. Under this type of payment scenario
          as it is usually the collectors’ responsibility to call the payment. I use GCS and
          I’ve seen this several times in the past, never once having an issue, however
          only Angelo can tell us the deal there. The report we are seeing may not be
          telling the whole story.

      • @cb4beb16fc9f829dbf012703b74cbad6:disqus Your comment was exactly the type of dialog I was looking for and I apologize for including you in the circle jerk session.  The DIY plug/debt settlement company bashing is exactly what’s wrong with this industry.  I’m a strong believer that there is a need for every solution (except the attorney model) but it seems the mentality here is in order to get your solution noticed you have to bash the other options. 

        • Angelo, please stop this. You are making yourself sound like an
          unprofessional jerk with this type of language. Consider that prospective
          clients may be reading this thread before deciding to do business with you. I
          have a thick skin, but some will be offended by such comments.


          Steve’s closing sentence asked for feedback. I wrote a brief comment
          stating my view, that’s all. You overreacted to it, big time. If you think that
          my comment is “exactly what’s wrong with this industry,” then you must live
          in Bizarro-world. What’s wrong with the industry is that a bunch of crooks and
          scammers got involved in it and messed it up for the rest of us who have always
          tried to do right by our clients. I’ve already said that I have nothing against
          you or your company, and I wish you all the best. Can we bury the hatchet now,

          • Charles, Im ok with my type of language, when Im having trouble enrolling consumers I’ll reconsider but understand when Im passionate about something I speak my mind.  I dont feel I over reacted to your comment, I feel you took a shot at settlement to plug your DIY either way it’s all good and the hatchet is buried – like I said, Im a fan of the DIY I just dont think its for everyone. 

            You have to admit though at this stage of the game we should be working together instead of bashing each other, it’s all over this site. Be honest, how many times has your enrollment department heard someone say “can’t I just pay you to do it for me?”  If they are not willing to negotiate for themselves do you just turn your back on them or do you refer them to a DS company?   If not, I doubt its because of the Chase/NCO post that started this whole thing. Do you refer them to a BK attorney or a non profit for debt management?  

            My point is that one product is not better than the other, there’s a need for them all….I hope you see where Im coming from with this and why I took offence to your comment.  I prefer to argue over the advance fee attorney model as well as how arrogant and crooked the banks and collection agencies are, I’d rather be on the same page with you my friend.  Peace

          • Angelo, thanks for clearing the air. I do understand where you’re coming from. For my part, I’m equally passionate. I have been out here for many years trying to promote the DIY option to
            consumers. It’s been uphill all the way. We both know that most sales
            reps will actively attempt to discourage people from the DIY method,
            even to the extent of telling outright lies about non-existent “special relationships” with
            creditors. I’ve even heard people say that a “debt consultant” told them it was *illegal* for them to negotiate their own debt. So please consider the baloney-mountain I’ve had to climb to educate people about this option.

            BTW, I don’t have an enrollment department. That would be me. 🙂 I don’t hear the “can’t you do it for me?” question very often, simply
            because people coming to my site are generally already inclined toward
            the DIY option anyway. If I did have someone who insisted, I would refer
            them to CRN, with whom (full disclosure) I have a business
            relationship. In the case of an obvious BK candidate, I refer them to NACA. I generally
            do not refer people to CCC, but as it happens I just pointed someone to yesterday to

            Anyway, we’re on the same page. It’s the attorney-model scammers that need to be the focus of our more vituperative posts and colorful language. 🙂

      • @18920cedc20ef3efe8dc08eea9a99127:disqus thats funny!  Errick still hasn’t responded to my offer to interview my graduated clients so Im not even going to address him on this one, he buries himself every time.

        • I didn’t respond because that was not what this thread is about.  My response is, I comment in public and everyone else should too.  Let’s see your success stories.

          • Errik’s opinion is generally rife with floccinaucinihilipilification… if we’re all using them there bigggg words.

          • floc·ci·nau·ci·ni·hil·i·pil·i·fi·ca·tion   [flok-suh-naw-suh-nahy-hil-uh-pil-uh-fi-key-shuhn] 
            nounRare. the estimation of something as valueless (encountered mainly as an example of one of the longest words in the English language).

  3. This is probably one of the most significant differences between the DIY (with a coach) approach and traditional third-party settlement. This refusal to honor a settlement is due to Chase’s general policy against working with third-party debt settlement firms. I’ve seen hundreds of consumer-direct settlements with this creditor in the past 1-2 years alone, many through collection agencies like NCO, and this problem did not happen in a single instance. More evidence that the consumer is far better off tackling the settlement project on their own — with a coach, of course.

    • Nice plug Charles but this happens occasionally when settlements are made at the same time an account is pulled, not just with Chase. At first they claim they will not honor the settlement but after some yelling and screaming and threats of lawsuits they will honor the settlement.  I wasn’t looking for advice or for you to solicit my clients, I was simply pointing out the tactics used and the arrogance behind those tactics. 

      • You are welcome to your clients, Angelo. I prefer not to take on consumers who are already enrolled with a settlement firm anyway. My only point was that this type of problem rarely occurs when the consumer negotiates the deal directly. This is a fact. Sorry if it bugs you.

        • You are being very naive (and not very truthful) Charles if you think this doesn’t happen to consumers who deal directly. It’s a fact that it has and does happen to consumers on a regular basis.  Is this the part where you tell me that consumers in your DIY program never get sued either?  

          BTW, I’m a fan of the DIY kits.  I think if consumers can stomach negotiating directly they should, but it’s not for everyone. We should be on the same side (the side of helping consumers).  There was nothing factual about your comment, it was just a plug to sell your product. I’d be willing to bet that it has happened to a few of the people who have purchased your ebook but have not reported it to you.  

          • Charles is not naive after having been in the field longer than most. He is one of the most blunt and honest people I have met in the industry.
            People get sued the longer debts remain unpaid. DIY allows debt to be settled faster because available funds go to debts and not fees thereby reducing risk of suit.
            Charles does not offer an “ebook”. He offers a physical product containing more than 8 hours of comprehensive material. In my opinion the content offers more than what 90% of the people offering debt settlement to consumers know themselves.

            Chase does not work with third parties in settlement, but will work directly with their card members. Chase generally does not approve of their contract collectors working with third parties.

          • Angelo, I have nothing against you or your company, and I was not trying to pick a fight with you. I’m sure based on your other comments here that you do your best to take good care of your clients. This problem has happened to many consumers who failed to educate themselves first on how to document their settlement correctly and then follow-up to the point of final closure. With proper coaching, it simply doesn’t crop up as a regular problem. And no, this isn’t the part where I say that DIY clients never get sued. Lawsuits happen against DIY clients too, including some of mine. I have never claimed otherwise. I do, however, claim that the risk of litigation is higher when consumers use a third-party firm.

        • I hate to disagree with you Charles, but I have seen many many consumers who have settled thier own debts only to have collectors/creditors not honor the settlement (some using a “coach”). Unfortunately, many times the consumer has not obtained the necessary documentation to prove the settlement. That is not to say that with PROPER coaching or assistance they can’t DIY effectively, but doing it entirely on thier own is not advisable. It is also a fact that even with assistance, be it coaching or represented, these things happen due to no fault of the consumer, thier coach, or thier representative.

          • Consumers who are well informed about the logistics of debt settlement ahead of time are extremely effective at settling and documenting their efforts. Having a coach available during the process is all the better.
            Both are available from Charles.

          • Fitz, point taken, but I was not referring to consumers trying to wing it based on whatever outdated info they find on the Internet. In other words, the “many consumers” you’ve seen who had this problem were not my clients. 🙂 It’s definitely about the documentation, as well as close follow-up. For example, we sometimes catch agencies failing to take a second or third payment due to whatever snafu in their system. If you wait too long, the result is a welshing on the settlement by the OC. But with the properly coached consumer paying close attention to the transactions, clerical errors can easily be nipped in the bud.

          • Certainly, from what I’ve seen, the assistance you provide to consumers is fantastic and I’ve have never seen one of your clients have this problem. In my mind your are among the few bright spots in the industry. I guess I’m giving you a hard time for not distinguishing between coaching and Phelan coaching! There are debt settlement provider bright spots too.

          • When you guys are all done blowing each other take another look at the settlement letter posted above.  All documented and there were no clerical errors, its the same exact settlement letter any of your DIY customers would receive.  The purpose of this post was to expose the banks nasty tactics but you guys are using it as a plug for your DIY…real smoooooth

          • When you guys are all done blowing each other take another look at the settlement letter posted above.  All documented and there were no clerical errors, its the same exact settlement letter any of your DIY customers would receive.  The purpose of this post was to expose the banks nasty tactics but you guys are using it as a plug for your DIY…real smoooooth

          • To activedebt: relax francis! At the end of your post Steve added: “Please post your comments below to help Active Debt and this consumer if you have any feedback on this or other similar situations”. In reply I gave a rather detailed response about what I have done in this situation. There was no attack and I in fact supported your response to Phelan. Nor do I do DIY. Why is it many in this industry continue to attack each other? The battle is against the creditor, and I appreciate that was your original point. thanks for the post.

      • Chase is smart and has good lawyers.  NCO is smart and, well they have a lot of lawyers.  They are arrogant because they send you a loophole big enough to drive a truck through and you lack the mental acuity to even notice it, much less do anything about it, again and again.  If you were sad enough to actually go to court with these documents the judge will actually laugh.

  4. I have seen this many times. The law may vary depending upon where the consumer resides, but generally there has been a novation or accord and satisfaction of the contract. If this was presented to a court, I’m confident the court would rule in the consumer’s favor. Problem is, its not in court. I generally write a letter to the creditor (Chase) stating they are stuck with the agreement thier agent (NCO) entered into and that consumer expects that the account will be properly reported and that any further collection efforts will not misrepresent the debt (in this case, mistating the debt, i.e. the balance due). I also tell them that consumer will not only defend any litigation brought on the account, but will also counter claim against anyone who brings it, including the lawyer Chase hires (because as we all know you can’t get Chase under the FDCPA, but you can lawyers). I also inform them that the consumer will pursue any violation of the FCRA and state laws similiar to the FDCPA (such as Rosenthal in CA). Bottom line, you gotta play some hardball and assert all of the consumers rights. This has worked virtually every time. I actually kinda hope they ignore all this so they can be sued and a recovery obtained for the consumer. This is probably best done by a lawyer.


Leave a Comment