8/18/2010 10:47 PM (PST)

Hello Adam,

Actually no, I don't think a company should work for free for two years. If a company does a good job there is no reason to have to work for free for two years. If you are then you are enrolling clients that should not be in a debt settlement program because they don't have the funds to settle the debts. Based on your comment I must insist that no consumer hire LHDR because according to you the company cannot do business under the new laws that go into effect on Oct 27th. If LHDR "cannot work on settlement fee's paid after the fact" as you put it, then by definition they either are going to go out of business or not be in compliance with the law correct?

Please don't get me started on your minimum guarantee. That is nothing but a marketing gimmick. 65%, come on Adam, anyone can get a settlement like that by accident. How good is your guarantee going to be to consumers if your company goes out of business because they are no longer able to charge consumers all of the money upfront?

6/9/2010 2:07 PM (PST)

Hi Zac,

Do you know which location you're looking at doing business with? Our records indicate that the company has locations all over the country, and each one handles it's own complaints.

Thanks!

6/11/2010 9:50 AM (PST)

Erin,

Dealing with a guy by the name of Phillip Congleton in California. Thanks, Zac

6/11/2010 10:19 AM (PST)

Hi Zac,

There are many locations in California. Do you know what city?

6/22/2010 11:21 AM (PST)

Hello Zac, I have a copy of their contract. Not good at all. High front loaded fees is the only thing you really need to know about them. I would stay away. You are taking all the risk and they are getting paid upfront. Would you hire a contractor that demanded payment in full when your house was only halfway completed? If you do need to hire a settlement company, you need to be very careful. The most important thing to look for is a company that charges you a fee based on the successful completion of a settlement. However, most consumers that think they need a debt settlement strategy, actually don't realize exactly what it entails, and that there are often times better options for dealing with your debts. In my opinion though, Legal Helpers is not a good program for consumers under any circumstances. Just ask Phillip Congleton in California this simple question. After all of your fees are paid, where does Legal Helpers get the money to provide you these promised services for the last 2 years or so of this program? And while your at it, ask him if he is so confident in this wonderful outcome that they are going to achieve for you, then why do they insist on getting paid before they get you out of debt?

8/18/2010 3:27 PM (PST)

Would you expect a company to front all the risk either? What if they worked for a client for 2 years and the client cancelled to go BK or to switch companies, please do not take offense but debtors are not well known for reliability. LHDR is a great baseline attorney plan for debt resolution. They have a minimum standard guarantee, if they don't provide you what they say they will then you get the cost paid back. Or if you wish to move into BK a majority of fee's will be applied as credit. It is well know that a company of this caliber cannot work on settlement fee's paid after the fact, 100's of thousands of dollars would be needed in reserves to pay for the daily business functions. I know of no one else that has the long term reliability of LHDR, that offers a minimum guarantee.

8/25/2010 10:46 AM (PST)

Damon Day does a great job of making everyone else look bad but himself...fact is that he spends more time discrediting every company, even reputable ones, by posting everywhere he can on the internet. So when people do their research, they see Damon Day assuming that every company is untrustworthy. His only argument is speculation based on the industry standard method of fee structure. he doesn't base his criticism on fact. So, here are some facts I found on the internet about Damon Day and Associates: http://freedebtsettlementcontractreview.com/

8/25/2010 12:10 PM (PST)

Hello Elizabeth,

I find it incredibly ironic that you are claiming I only use speculation to discredit every debt settlement company, when this link that you are claiming are facts about me is an anonymous website with absolutely no clue as to who wrote it. Were you curious as to who would want to attack me personally?

I appreciate you giving me the opportunity to let consumers know that this personal attack was written by Dan Smith the President of New Era Debt Solutions. Is this one of the reputable companies that you are speaking of? Dan Smith is willing to lie and mislead consumers by trying to scare them away from learning the information that I will share.

So if anyone would like to read my response to Dan Smith's personal attack they can go to
http://damonday.com/1241/president-of-new-era-debt-solutions-attacks-me-its-just-par-for-the-course/

Unlike Dan Smith from New Era Debt Solutions, I give consumers enough credit to spot BS when they see it. They are more than welcome to call as many debt settlement sales people as they want, they can listen to as many free sales pitches as they want, and then if they chose, they can call me for a consultation. Based on that, then they can make an informed decision about the best course of action for themselves and their family.

Now, to correct what you have said, I don't discredit every company. If I see a specific company that I think is misleading or ripping off consumers I will write about why I think that. I leave it up to consumers to decide what to do with that information. Isn't it their choice anyway? Why are you afraid of someone telling consumers that front loaded fee structures are a bad way to go? Do you work for such a company?

Tell you what Elizabeth, I will do you a huge favor. Why don't you take this opportunity to explain to anyone that reads this why a front loaded fee structure is in the best financial interest of consumers and creditors. Then I will respond, and we will let readers decide who makes the most sense. Sound fair?

Debt Settlement sales people attack me all the time for obvious reasons, but so far not one of them has taken me up on my request to publicly discuss how a front loaded fee debt settlement program can possibly be good for consumers or creditors. Will you be the first one willing to do it?
I eagerly await your response.

9/10/2010 6:11 PM (PST)

So how do the companies get cash flow to stay in business if they can't charge any fees upfront Damon? It can take years to settle debt. How do they survive meanwhile?

9/10/2010 9:54 PM (PST)

Hello Kevin,

Well first off, I don't think there is anything wrong with companies charging a reasonable retainer. Not a front loaded fee, but a little something upfront. However, I am not the FTC and I don't make the rules. The reason the FTC banned all advance fees was because there were much more consumers getting ripped off than getting helped. So because TASC and USOBA didn't actually try to prevent consumers from getting ripped off, the FTC finally stepped in and just put a blanket ban.

Now to address your specific question. It requires an understanding of how a typical business model works. Before people got used to the idea that you could purchase a $10 dollar .com name and be in business with no capital investment.

Most businesses actually had to raise money to open, they typically don't even turn a profit for three to five years. So you have to either invest your own money or convince investors that you have the knowledge and skill to run and operate a successful settlement business.

This is actually a good thing. The reason this industry is so out of control is because of the $10 .comers deciding one day that they were experts and a ton of wannabes flooded into the market place and started charging people all kinds of money and making promises that they couldn't keep. The consumers became the unwitting investors for all these startup wannabes that a venture capitalist wouldn't touch with a 10 foot pole.

So with the advance fee ban, it will require more of an investment in a company to get it going. This means much less fly by night operations, that come in and simply steal money from consumers for years before having to really perform much of a service.

So if you don't have any money, and you cannot convince someone that you are going to be successful enough that they will invest the money with you, you cannot be in business. Now people that should not be offering a service that they don't really know much about, will not be able to simply take money from consumers to get their business off the ground.

This advance fee ban will get rid of most of the rip off marketers that aren't going to be able to make much money if a client is not successful. Here is the problem in a nutshell. Consumer pays fees upfront, marketer gets paid, settlement company gets paid, client may or may not get help. So marketers enrolled anyone with a pulse into the program. Everyone always got paid and the customer usually got screwed. Everyone benefited but the customer.

So now things are flipped. A debt settlement company will have to invest their own money and resources into each client that they bring on. So they are going to get a lot more picky about the clients they accept. They will not want to accept unqualified clients, because now they will lose money if they do. They are going to have to train their marketers to only enroll qualified clients. Now the motto will be quality over quantity. Any company that con

9/10/2010 9:57 PM (PST)

Wow, I guess I got a little long there and it cut me off. Here is the rest of my response.......


Any company that continues to enroll clients that don't belong in a debt settlement program, will quickly go out of business. It is natural selection at its best.

It is just like why the bank wants a down payment on a house. If you have your money on the line, you're more likely to stick to the agreement. If debt settlement companies have their own money on the line, they are much more likely to perform a successful service so they can recoup their money.

Also, if you think it takes years to settle debt, then some company has sold you a bunch of crap. If you have a client in the right situation for a debt settlement, you should be able to start settling debt within 4 to 5 months max. As you settle the debt you can charge your fee. This advance fee ban, will also now encourage companies to try and help their clients raise the money and settle the debt as quickly as possible, rather than stretch it out for 4 or 5 years with low payments just to get the client to sign up. Again, better for the client.

If your business is not capitalized enough to go 4 or 5 months before it can generate some cash, then you are under capitalized and will go out of business. It is simply business 101.

Bottom line, debt settlement companies and sales people will now have a very large vested interest in the ability of their clients to succeed, where as before there was absolutely none.

Companies that provide a good service will grow and prosper, those that don't will go out of business quickly.

Frankly what really scares me is all of these debt settlement companies that are in a panic because they can't figure out how to run a business without charging all of the money years before the service is performed. These people should not be in business and had this ban been in place a few years ago, they would have never been able to start. Now they are going to go out of business, and really hurt a lot of consumers that have already paid all of those fees.

9/11/2010 1:55 PM (PST)

Damon, It seems that your still off on your understanding of the economics of the business. Even an established and legitimate Debt Reduction company that does qualify it's clients and has thousands of satisfied clients and performs a legitimate service that invests lots of its own money into the business. It can still take years to finally settle a debt because the clients do have to accumulate their OWN cash. Waiting for the funds to finally settle the debt and THEN get paid proved to be a cash flow nightmare. Though basic expenses may be covered, it virtually wipes out the company having any liquidity for growth, expansion, etc. I should know, I'm in the biz and my VERY legitimate company tried it.

9/11/2010 6:35 PM (PST)

Kevin,
I am not quite sure what to say. You are claiming I am off on my understanding of the economics of the settlement business simply because you couldn't make it work? Um, then you are doing it wrong. Not sure how I can put that more delicately.

The facts are, that there are a few settlement companies that have been operating this way for years. However, you don't have to take my word for it. I will direct you to an article I recently wrote were I quoted the law firm of Loeb and Loeb, a very well respected firm in the debt settlement industry and featured speaker at many USOBA conferences. Basically, the go to law firm for debt settlement companies for legal and regulatory advice.

http://damonday.com/2481/i-just-dont-know-if-i-told-you-so-properly-expresses-how-i-feel/

Not only does Loeb and Loeb say that it can be done, but based on companies that are doing it, it may actually be a more profitable and stable way to grow a debt settlement company. Do you also think they don't have an understanding of the debt settlement business model?

Now, I suspect the problem is that your definition of a qualified client is much different than my definition. In fact I know it is, because if your client success rate is anywhere south of at least 80% than you are enrolling a lot of clients that you shouldn't be. If your graduation rates are north of 80% than you should have no problem running a profitable business on a performance based model.

You should not be enrolling clients that are going to take longer that 24 months to raise the funds, period. If you do, your client lawsuits will skyrocket, your graduation rates will plummet and you will be out of business. So you have to retrain your sales people, because most of them thus far are incentivized by quantity of enrollments and give little regard to proper qualification.

I mean let’s be honest for a second. Your sales people get paid up front, your company gets paid up front. Why do you care whether or not a client is going to make it? You get paid regardless right? The poor client is the one that suffers because he came to you or your sales person for advice, and like clockwork the advice is, sign up into our settlement program. What incentive do you have to tell that person that bankruptcy is really a better route for you because you don't have enough money to settle these debts for many years? Obviously that is your problem, as evidenced by the fact that you keep saying it takes years to settle a debt because the clients don't have the money.

You can tell me I am wrong and you do qualify your clients, but the reality is you don't, because you can't be profitable unless you charge your clients upfront. By definition then, a lot of your clients are going to pay and not settle their debts. If that wasn't the case, then it wouldn't matter when a well capitalized company collected their fees. Do you disagree with this?

If you want to have a discussion about t

9/11/2010 6:35 PM (PST)

Oops, long again. It would be nice if this box would tell you when you are over the character limit.


If you want to have a discussion about these facts, I will be happy to elaborate, but the bottom line is, you are enrolling the wrong clients and probably need to tweak your revenue allocation. Also your marketing costs will go way down shortly after the fee ban goes into effect. This is because all of these programs that don't know how to qualify clients and provide a good service are going to be out of business. So the cost to acquire a qualified client in my opinion is going to decrease by at least 75% within the next year and get back to what it was 6 or 7 years ago, before the market became saturated with rip off, front loaded fee programs.

Hope that helps.

9/12/2010 1:33 PM (PST)

Hello Damon, again, I don't agree with your views. That doesn't make my company or my views wrong. As I said that we do qualify our clients and are highly successful at what we do. We are well capitalized and are able to easily cover all of our expenses but on-going cash flow can be a problem without a pay-as-you-go model, especially when financial circumstances change negatively for our clients (job loss,etc). Our Sales people are paid over a period of time as well, not upfront. I haven't put my companies name out so obviously I'm not speaking in the interest of promoting my company but from our performance based model, that is one of the best in the business, Our company is one of the most successful at resolving debt crisis and we've been providing this successful service for many years longer than you have. We do have a greater than 80% success rate Our clients ARE pre-qualified and not SOLD on one model. We never sell them on debt settlement. When they have been qualified for a debt settlement program they are provided a pay as you go model that spreads their payment over about 24 months, funds are accumulating to their creditors and we are getting paid as well. We require no upfront initial deposits. We screen our clients by looking at a variety of options. We have and do direct them to bankruptcy or other options if that is what is necessary. We do more than debt settlement but I expect after the October 27th ruling we will be one of the few companies that remain profitable in the debt settlement area. From your response, your clearly looking to discredit any company or any option other than your own and position yourself as an authority. I don't see your credentials other than purportedly helping others in debt. My company is very successful and has an extremely low failure rate plain and simple. Though we've had many clients finish a year or more early, your's is a pie-in-the sky view that all clients who need help should be able to get out of debt in only 24 months. You continually use the term rip-off. We have NEVER ripped anyone off and our BBB record as well as a search of our name via internet sites prove that. Further, we have even given clients MONEY BACK even when they have been wrong and violated the terms of our agreement! Loeb and Loeb performs a variety of legal services and they don't say which companies are successful and how they have succeeded at stabilizing cash flow to support their claim. Why would we care if our clients debt is resolved with our pay as they go model? This may be a shock to you Damon but we ACTUALLY WANT TO HELP THEM!

9/12/2010 2:22 PM (PST)

Kevin,

I am wondering if the readers are as confused as I am right now. You came on here 2 days ago and asked me how a company is supposed to get cash flow without upfront money. I told you how to do it and why it can work. Then you responded and said I don't know what I am talking about because you tried it and it didn't work. So I explained to you why it likely didn't work. Then you come on and say you are very successful, one of the best in the business and one of the few companies that will remain profitable after the fee ban goes into effect. Huh, so which is it? You want to know how to run a profitable business without charging upfront because you tried it and can't, or are you so successful that you will be one of the few companies who succeed?

It seems your agenda is to simply attack me as is typical with debt settlement sales people. I never tried to discredit your company as you claim. I don't even know who your company is. If you read my answer I was speaking in general terms of what will happen to companies who have less than an 80% success rate. If yours is higher than that, then you shouldn't have any problems.

You asked me how you could be profitable because you tried and it didn't work. I told you why it probably didn't work and now you jump on the defense and say that you do everything that I said needed to be done to be profitable and you claim that you are in fact one of the few profitable programs. That sort of proves my point doesn't it? You claim I don't have any credentials, but then you prove that everything I said a company must to is exactly what you do and you are so successful because you do those things. Perhaps I understand this industry better than you would like huh?

So I will ask, what was your agenda for asking me the original question if you actually are as you claim, going to be one of the only profitable companies left after the fee ban? Wouldn’t that mean, you already knew the answer to the question?

Also, if you think my window of 2 years for settlement is a "pie in the sky" then we just have two different view points on the type of clients that should be in a debt settlement program. Somehow I don't think anything I say is going to change your view on that, but I will leave you with this question. Is it true that a consumer who ignores a debt for 3 years is statistically more likely to be sued than a consumer who resolves the debt in 1 year. Yes or No?

9/12/2010 7:43 PM (PST)

The answer to your question is yes of course the clients are statistically more likely to be sued Damon but it has been a very rare occurrence and the debt is still settled out of court right after the client appears there anyway. There would be so many left out in a financial storm if the only time frame they were allowed was two years to pay off their debt. Two years to pay off $50k or more is unrealistic for the many clients we've helped. They simply can't afford that. Less than 2% of our clients have ever been sued and they were even settled out of court. Damon, the original question was rhetorical. I did have the answer, I was simply allowing you a forum to explain the logic behind your statement. The question was not intended to ask you to help us figure out how to solve our cash flow issue. Also, I'm not the owner of the company, I merely work for it and stay well informed by management. I have no agenda to attack or discredit you, why would I? You haven't attacked us directly. I'm simply saying your answers don't make much practical sense. Everything I have told you is factual and true. You appear to be talking from theory or hypothetical and possibly a few anecdotal experiences you've had. I'm here in the trenches actually experiencing what really happens daily. Further, I would rather be shot than ruin someone's financial life for a quick buck, I couldn't live with myself. That's not who I am and that's not what my company represents. All I'm saying is that there are holes in your theory my friend. Maybe your just getting sensitive. I will say again very clearly that your theory of compensation only upon the completion of an actual settlement doesn't work or it certainly is not the only legitimate way to do this, period. Understand that?? P.s. If I wanted to make boat loads of money this certainly wouldn't be the industry I chose.

9/12/2010 8:02 PM (PST)

p.s. I challenge you to start a separate Debt Settlement Company Damon. Do the following as we do: 1. Have a licensed attorney to represent your clients in their state. 2.Don't take any upfront Deposits 3. Make sure you have a written guarantee that they will get their money back and very often even give them they're money back anyway if their unreasonably upset and what they want defies what they've signed in the contract 4. Make sure you do all of this so that your BBB stays as an A rating and you get no complaints. Now, DEPART with us by doing the following 1. Don't do a pay as you go system only get paid upon completion of a successful reduction of the debt 2. Make sure all of your clients are allowed only 2yrs MAX to get out of debt in your debt settlement program. I guarantee you would do 1 of 3 things: 1. Go out of business 2. Start ripping your clients off or 3. Change your business model and start writing articles talking about the practical reasons a clients debt reduction program needs to be closer to the program that I've explained that we currently provide. We've turned the model upside down and every way possible to make sure that the program is extremely consumer friendly and still practical for us to survive economically. We intend to continue to do that. Our management is both very fair and brilliant which is why were prepared for Oct 27th and will be highly successful thereafter.

9/12/2010 9:52 PM (PST)

Ahh, now it is starting to make more sense. Even though you kept calling it your company, you are not the owner but an employee and only privy to what management wants you to know. Ok, look I don't know your company or how your management runs its business, but as an employee, you might not be privy to everything that is going on.

I am trying to piece the mystery of this back and forth together as I get bits and pieces of information from you.

So here is where I am at. You work for a settlement company, likely as a sales rep who believes they do a good job for clients and wants to help people. However, your company charges a front loaded fee over 24 months, even though you put a sales spin on that and call it a pay as you go performance model with no upfront fees.

Your company has not been able to figure out how to run a profitable company without charging your fees in the manner in which you charge them as evidenced by two statements you made.
1. I am wrong and don't know what I am talking about because your company tried this model and it didn't work.
2. Direct quote from your last post - "I will say again very clearly that your theory of compensation only upon the completion of an actual settlement doesn't work"

Ok, so here is where you go off the rails. That isn't my theory, that is what you are going to have to do if you are going to be in compliance with the new FTC law. Currently your company is not in compliance as evidenced by the fact you front load your fees. However you claim that your company is going to be one of the only profitable companies after the fee ban that your company has yet to figure out a way to comply with. You are confident about the future success of your company even though they weren't able to make the model required by the FTC work, because you are well informed by management. You don’t agree with my “theory” as you call it in spite of the overwhelming evidence that the model your company uses is bad for consumers.

Well, I hate to be the one to break the news, but in my experience, employees are usually the last to know when things are going south. They want to keep the morale up right until the end. Again, I am not saying that is going to happen, I don't know your company, but to say you know how well your company is doing because management keeps you informed, doesn't really carry much weight. There are several debt settlement companies that are slashing their staff by more than half to get lean and switch their business model in a panic. Do you think management might not want to inform you of that if they were going to do that in a few months?

As far as your claim of not having a problem settling debt right after the client appears in court. Remember the client still has to have the money to settle the debt. If they don't, you obviously will have a problem. Just make sure your clients are aware of the gamble that you are taking with their finances even though you are guar

9/12/2010 9:56 PM (PST)

oops. again with that length limit.

Just make sure your clients are aware of the gamble that you are taking with their finances even though you are guaranteed to get paid regardless of what happens to them. Also I never said if a client couldn't raise the money in 24 months they shouldn't get help. I said maybe the help you are providing is not the right kind. There is a difference.

To address your challenge. It sounds like your company has quite a bit of work ahead in order to comply by next month. I don't have the need or the desire to start a debt settlement company, there are enough of those around. I think I provide a much better service by spending my time helping consumers with unbiased information to find the correct solution to their financial challenges. I certainly don't see a lot of that around. If a consumer needs a good settlement company, then I can provide them with some good ones to research and compare to the ones they have already found. Or I can typically negotiate a price discount for them with a company that they like and want to work with.

I wish you the best in your company’s efforts to honestly help consumers and be profitable in the new regulatory environment.

If you would like to discuss why the “pay as you go model” as you call it, over the first half of a settlement program has no merit or benefit to consumers, I will be happy to have that discussion. In the spirit of the debate, I will inform you that the facts are on my side, and this isn’t my first rodeo, but it will be a fun discussion for sure. So far no debt settlement sales person has ever taken me up on that challenge. I welcome you to be the first. To start, please answer this question. Explain how charging all of your companies fees over the first 24 months of a 36 or 48 month program is financially beneficial to both consumers and their creditors?

Also, I am out in the open. You mentioned earlier that you didn’t disclose the name of your company because you didn’t want free publicity. Well, with all the time you are putting in here, I think it is only fair that you get this free publicity for your company. Especially if you can explain how a front loaded fee is great for consumers, they should know the name of your program so they can call for more information if they like what they hear. Don’t you agree?

9/13/2010 12:01 AM (PST)

No matter what anyone says, Damon is just going to repeat himself, like a broken record, he’s a debt settlement sales person like everyone he criticizes...pay for performance is a concept, its an answer to all the ill legit companies take upfront feels and not settling debt. Its because an excessive number of people have been burned by these fake debt settlement companies that this law had to be created. Right there should tell you something.

THE LAW WAS CREATED TO PREVENT PEOPLE FROM GETTING RIPPED OFF… NOT BECAUSE IT’S BETTER THAN FRONT LOADING FEES.

In fact, its not, it’s a mean to an end of scams. A necessary evil if you will. To prevent scams, the SEC created a law that hinders actual negotiators, but protects the people from fake negotiators.

On the down side, pay for performance usually costs more. You debt may start at $80k, but eventually balloons to $100k while Damon is waiting for debt to go to collections. In the end, Damon will charge you a percentage based on the amount the Debt ballooned upto…so he WANTS the creditors to charge a bunch of fees and interest…so you debt gets higher before he tries to settle it. In the end, you end up paying more to settle you debt and more in fees because the amount he “saves” you gets bigger as the debt gains interests and fees.

While Damon is busy arguing the above statement, pay attention to his response on this one:

Since there are NO NEGOCIATIONS happening in the first 6 months anyway, it makes sense to get most of fees out of the way, so that when it comes time to negotiate, all the clients money can be put toward a settlement, a larger sum of money going to the creditor will entice them to settle lower. If you pay more to fees at the time of the settlement, then there is LESS money to go toward the settlement. Paying Up Front gets the fees out of the way so the negotiators are able to do their job. So as long as you can trust the company you are having do you debt settlement, then front loading fees are the smarter way to go. Of course, since Damon will say every company is untrustworthy, that front loaded fees are dangerous. The fact is, not every company in the industry is a scam…on the contrary, most, with front loaded fees, have successfully negotiated debt on hundreds of thousands of accounts…and they did it for MUCH less than Damon Day.

Damon Day is PROFITING on your FEAR OF BEING SCAMMED…he makes more money per client than front loaded fee companies do. Maybe not at a first, but once you debt it settled, you’ll see that you paid WELL over 13% of your ORGINAL debt amount. That’s why he can afford to do this people!!!! Wake up! Nothing is free, nothing is without risk, and no matter what way you cut it, this program is going to sting a little. Its not something you do because you want to save money, its something you do because you don’t have another option.

9/13/2010 1:07 AM (PST)

Elizabeth,

Wow, you seem to have me all figured out. Based on what information do you claim I am a debt settlement sales person? Have you actually been to my website?

I must give you credit, I have not heard this argument before.

Let’s look at what you just said. You seem to believe that the law was created only to prevent dishonest companies, well, the problem with your argument is that a front loaded fee screws consumers whether you understand why or not. You can have all the love in your heart but if you don't have a basic understanding of why a front loaded fee is bad, then you aren't helping anyone and it is pretty scary to think you are out there every day telling consumers what they should do to get rid of their debts.

Let me break it down. I can't really believe that you are arguing that since debt can't be settled for six months then it is good to just get the fees out of the way. Really? Besides the fact that many debts can be settled much sooner than that, what happens when you hit month six and all you have been doing is paying fees? The client has no money for settlement because they spent it all getting the fees out of the way. Not to mention they likely still have another year in fees. So how many debts are going to be settled in the first 6 to 12 months. Not many. So now the creditor has to charge off the debt because there is no lump sum available. Please help me wrap my head around why that is a good thing for your client? I certainly understand why the settlement company likes this. But the client????

I argue that if you are going to try and settle your debts it shouldn't be longer than 2 years or less, you routinely put people into programs for much longer than that. Under which scenario do you think the fees and interest will be higher? Mine or yours? Yet you nonsensically claim I just recommend people sit and wait for fees and interest to accrue.

Your arguments don't even make financial sense. You argue that front loaded fee companies have successfully negotiated debt on 100's of 1000's of dollars. What you didn't say was that they collected fees for a much larger amount of debt that never got settled. So based on your reasoning Bernie Madoff was really a good guy. After all he made a lot of people rich so that would make him a success and a good guy to do business with right? Ohh, I forgot the minor detail that he ripped off a lot more people than he made rich, but who cares about little details like that.

How did you come up with the math that I make more money per client than a front loaded debt settlement company? I don't do debt settlement?

Elizabeth, I want you to forget about the sales script for a second and really think about what you said. Do you honestly believe that it is better for clients to divert all of their money to your company so they can get that out of the way? Do you really believe that? If you really believe that makes financial sense, I don't k

9/13/2010 1:08 AM (PST)

Elizabeth, I want you to forget about the sales script for a second and really think about what you said. Do you honestly believe that it is better for clients to divert all of their money to your company so they can get that out of the way? Do you really believe that? If you really believe that makes financial sense, I don't know what else to say other than it sort of proves my point about taking financial advice from sales people. No offense intended. You are in a bad position of trying to defend something that can't be logically defended.

I give you points for your effort, and of course I see you wrapped your nonsensical answer in a fabricated attack about me personally. It is unfortunate, but hey what else are you supposed to say? You can't very well admit to yourself that I make a lot of sense. Sort of like do you take the blue pill and continue to go to work every day and sell your program as if nothing has changed, or do you take the red pill, and admit to yourself that there is a lot of truth in what I am saying. Taking the red pill would leave you in a bad spot financially and looking for a job in a tough economy. So I understand your need to attack me. All a consumer has to do is glance at my website to see what you are claiming I do is clearly not what I actually do. The important thing for me is that consumers can read both sides and make up their own mind.

For consumers I simply recommend you talk to all the sales people you want, and then call me for a second opinion. Based on that information, decide what you think is best for you and your family. It is pretty simple. I encourage clients to explore all options. Debt Settlement sales people attack me personally and want you to sign up into their program before you talk to anyone else, especially me. If someone is afraid of you getting a second opinion, I recommend you get one.

9/14/2010 11:42 AM (PST)

I worked with LHDR to try to fix my debt. I'm worse now then when they started "working" with me. They didn't do anything. They didn't contact my creditors, they didn't take the phone calls (I had to), meanwhile they were taking money out of my account. When I did manage to get through to customer service, I was rushed off the phone or told to write a letter or call back. So after dealing with all that, I told them to stop drafting my account. They did stop, but now i'm out $1000.00 and no recourse because they aren't giving it back. They said I had to request a refund in writing and then wait. Well, I did that. They think they did $1000.00 worth of work, so I'm not getting any of that back. And now I'm mad. I was on a non-profit debt reduction plan but my wife convinced me to go with Legal Helpers because it would be faster and cheaper. After this fiasco I called up all my creditors (who never did received those letters of representation - and wouldn't work with LHDR even if they did..something LHDR won't tell you). And am trying to fix this mess by myself. Managed to get two of my creditors to lower my interest rates and put me on a payment plan. That's a start. Two more went into collections while I was dealing with LHDR. So I guess I gotta deal with that. I already filed a complaint with the BBB, but I don't think that will lead to much. Seems they've been getting no response to the complaints. I bet the complaints will skyrocket here real soon. In short: I should have stayed on the plan I was on, but I listened to my wife who was sucked into the pitch. Worst mistake I could have made. STAY CLEAR OF THIS COMPANY. Read some of the complaints on BBB to see similar stories to mine, only a couple of which have been addressed.

9/14/2010 1:07 PM (PST)

Hello Anthony,

Your experience is unfortunate, but sadly it is very common among consumers. What happened to you is a perfect example of why the FTC moved forward to Ban the practice of allowing debt settlement companies to charge these advance fees.
When you look at your experience and 100's of 1000's of other consumers that had the same thing happen to them, Elizabeth's argument, of "it is in a client's best interest to pay all the fees upfront to get them out of the way" doesn't really make any sense at all.

Had this fee ban been in place when you enrolled, and you figured out a few months later that you were not happy with the service, or you figured out that a settlement approach was not your best avenue to resolve your debt, you could have cancelled and not been out over 1,000 dollars. You could have used that 1,000 dollars to help negotiate your accounts or interest rates with the creditors.

Now a settlement company is going to be forced to properly screen clients for appropriateness in a program, fully explain how debt settlement works and how the client will really be effected, and perform the actual service that the client is being sold. They will now be trying to settle the debts as fast as humanly possible because that is when they get paid and gone will be the days of 4 and 5 year debt settlement programs that have dropout rates in the 90% range. The companies that are afraid of this law, are the ones that know they can't do these things.

I can't promise anything but if you would like me to write an article about your experience on my website, I can document your story and request a refund on your behalf from Legal Helpers. Again, I can't promise that they will honor the request, but I have had quite a bit of success in the past in getting refunds when consumers were unable to. If you think it is worth a shot, just contact me through my profile here. You can share your story with me and we can figure out the best way to proceed.

10/1/2010 9:45 AM (PST)

My elderly parents are currently involved with LHDR, and it is not good. They've taken over $1200 from them and done nothing. They did not contact any of the creditors as promised, and my parents were still being bombarded with calls from creditors. They were actually told by one rep that they were "lucky" they qualified to get into this program. I think the only one who got "lucky" is the representative getting commission off of my parents money! My parents now realize that they must file bankruptcy, they contacted LHDR again to tell them this is what they wanted to do, and LHDR told them not to worry because they had attorneys on staff who could assist them in filing. They have spoken to one of their attorneys and were told they have to pay an additional $1800 to proceed. When my parents asked if they could apply the $1200 they've already given the company, they were told no because "that money has been used for legal and management fees". Are you kidding me? I've told my parents to get detailed invoices from them showing what exactly they did to earn these "legal and management fees". I am utterly disgusted! I realize we are in a really bad economy and people need to do what they have to do to make a living, but if you prey on the desperate - especially when they are elderly, and/or ill, then you are special class of scum.

10/1/2010 12:37 PM (PST)

I'm sorry. LHDR should apply that $1200 toward bankruptcy fees instead. How long have they been in the program? obviously they were trying to avoid bankrupcy but now they have no choice because they can;t afford the payments, right?

I'm sure LHDR contacted the creditors as promised...who did you ask to verify? the creditors? because they will just lie to you and say they never recieved the letters.

Also, the fees that are charged are clearly shown on the contract when they signed it...you don't need to find "invoices"... there are none.

If your parents were able to afford to stay in the program, then when they got out of debt, you'd see that the fees were well worth it. Sorry to hear your parents can't afford a debt settlement program and that bankruptcy is their only option.

Are you give them legal advice to go with Bankruptcy?

10/1/2010 3:47 PM (PST)

Elizabeth, come on now. I know you are a bit bias because you sell debt settlement, but did you really just say "if your parents were able to afford to stay in the program, then when they got out of debt, you'd see that all the fees were well worth it." And you are sorry to hear that his parents couldn't afford it. So you are saying it is their fault that a sales affiliate of LHDR signed them up and took 1200 dollars and put them on a plan that they couldn't afford? The problem is consumers are calling sales people for help, and this is the sort of thing that sales people do. What should happen is Legal Helpers should look into this case and evaluate the financial circumstances that are requiring their clients to file Bankruptcy. If they find that these circumstances were evident at the time of enrollment, then at minimum all of the fees should be applied to the BK. What scares me Elizabeth is that you appear to sell debt settlement (based on your previous writings), and you seem to think that your clients should have just looked at the fees in the contract and known whether or not they could afford it. And if they drop out because they can't afford it then it is their fault. The problem is that it isn't their fault. They are calling you for financial assistance and they are getting a good sales pitch that is covering up for bad advice. Would you like me to highlight this example as further proof of my above point that front loaded fees are a scam, and only done to benefit settlement companies? You clearly pointed out that the client got no benefit unless they finished the program, but LHDR got a 1200 benefit for nothing. Does that sound fair? Please don't give me the standard line about Legal Helpers contacted your creditors and if they told you different they are liars. I can't say whether or not legal helpers contacted this client's creditors or not, but what I can say, is that if they did, the creditor is probably more likely to sue the client. So I would echo the question from R.S. just what did legal helpers do to earn the 1200 dollars? You know the answer is that all or most of that money went to the sales person. You won't ever admit that because that is how you make your money. The truth is that LHDR received little if any of that money and it mostly went to the sales affiliate, not to pay an attorney to send some form letters to creditors. Who charges 1200 to send form letters? Now, instead of telling R.S. that it is just too bad and you are sorry, why don't we actually help his parents get their money back so they can file Bankruptcy. R.S. please contact the actual sales affiliate as well as legal helpers and inform them of your circumstances. If these circumstances are the same as they where when you signed up into the program and the sales person, didn't bother to ask or understand why BK was a better option then I feel you have good grounds to have that money fully credited toward a BK which is a more appr

10/1/2010 3:49 PM (PST)

Elizabeth, come on now. I know you are a bit bias because you sell debt settlement, but did you really just say "if your parents were able to afford to stay in the program, then when they got out of debt, you'd see that all the fees were well worth it." And you are sorry to hear that his parents couldn't afford it. So you are saying it is their fault that a sales affiliate of LHDR signed them up and took 1200 dollars and put them on a plan that they couldn't afford? The problem is consumers are calling sales people for help, and this is the sort of thing that sales people do. What should happen is Legal Helpers should look into this case and evaluate the financial circumstances that are requiring their clients to file Bankruptcy. If they find that these circumstances were evident at the time of enrollment, then at minimum all of the fees should be applied to the BK. What scares me Elizabeth is that you appear to sell debt settlement (based on your previous writings), and you seem to think that your clients should have just looked at the fees in the contract and known whether or not they could afford it. And if they drop out because they can't afford it then it is their fault. The problem is that it isn't their fault. They are calling you for financial assistance and they are getting a good sales pitch that is covering up for bad advice. Would you like me to highlight this example as further proof of my above point that front loaded fees are a scam, and only done to benefit settlement companies? You clearly pointed out that the client got no benefit unless they finished the program, but LHDR got a 1200 benefit for nothing. Does that sound fair? Please don't give me the standard line about Legal Helpers contacted your creditors and if they told you different they are liars. I can't say whether or not legal helpers contacted this client's creditors or not, but what I can say, is that if they did, the creditor is probably more likely to sue the client. So I would echo the question from R.S. just what did legal helpers do to earn the 1200 dollars? You know the answer is that all or most of that money went to the sales person. You won't ever admit that because that is how you make your money. The truth is that LHDR received little if any of that money and it mostly went to the sales affiliate, not to pay an attorney to send some form letters to creditors. Who charges 1200 to send form letters?

10/1/2010 3:50 PM (PST)

(I don't know why the formatting is all screwy, I put paragraph breaks in but they don't show up, and there is no way to edit after I post) Now, instead of telling R.S. that it is just too bad and you are sorry, why don't we actually help his parents get their money back so they can file Bankruptcy. R.S. please contact the actual sales affiliate as well as legal helpers and inform them of your circumstances. If these circumstances are the same as they where when you signed up into the program and the sales person, didn't bother to ask or understand why BK was a better option then I feel you have good grounds to have that money fully credited toward a BK which is a more appropriate solution for your parents. Or get a refund and hire your own BK attorney. After all, LHDR does BK so they should be able to find a way to resolve this situation to everyones satisfaction. If you do not get anywhere with that or get a refund from the sales affiliate, who took your money and gave you what appears to be bad advice, then I would recommend you contact Tom Macey. He is a senior partner with the Legal Helpers law firm and he gave me his email address in a previous exchange in a public forum. So I do not believe he will have a problem with me giving it out here. You can reach him at tmacey@legalhelpersdr.com It seems to me that the refund problem is likely with a sales affiliate and I am sure Mr. Macey would like to be made aware of a situation if a sales associate who represents his firm is enrolling consumers into a program that is not a financially viable solution. R.S. Please keep me updated on how things work out. Let me know if I can be of any further help.

6/10/2011 7:23 PM (PST)

Just wanted to update everyone, Legal Helpers Debt Resolution was just hit with a class action lawsuit in Virginia. See article at http://getoutofdebt.org/28428/legal-helpers-debt-resolution-slapped-with-class-action-case-in-north-carolina-local-attorney-said-to-be-just-a-front