Mischievous Debt Collectors Settle FTC Charges for Deceiving Consumers with Fake Debt Collection


Debt Collection Gone Wild

A North Carolina debt collection operation, Lombardo, Daniels & Moss, and its principals, Dion Barron and Charles R. Montgomery III, may no longer participate in the debt collection business. In other words, the principals and respective business receive a life time ban. The Federal Trade Commission ban is the result of using false threats to convince people to pay for non-existing debts.

According to the FTC, the scheme boasts an assortment of trade names that may be mistaken for law firms. Within the construct of the scheme, the defendants claim that consumers are delinquent on payday loans and other debts. When the consumers disagree to pay, the con artist debt collectors invoke threats for arrest and other formal legal repercussions.

In addition to banning the defendants from debt collection activities, the settlement orders prohibit them from buying or selling debt. Furthermore, they may not make misrepresentations about any products or services. Additionally, they may not profit from consumer information as part of their unscrupulous practice.

Federal Trade Commission Settlement Details

The order against Montgomery and Lombardo, Daniels & Moss imposes a $2,722,452 judgment. The principals of the firm are jointly and severally liable for the judgement. Barron is responsible for $1,635,803, which represents the amount of consumer harm before his departure from the firm. For clarification, the order against Barron imposes a judgment of $1,814,045. Moreover, Barron is jointly and severally liable for $1,635,803 with the other defendants. Upon the surrender of certain assets, the judgments may be partially suspended. In each instance, the full judgment is due immediately if the defendants misrepresent their financial condition.

The Federal Trade Commission vote approves the final order against Barron, unanimously. In like manner the Commission approves the final order against Montgomery and Lombardo, Daniels & Moss, unanimously. Both orders are subject to review by the U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, Charlotte Division.