Proposed information collection, Debt Collection Survey from the Consumer Credit Panel, OMB Control No XXXX; Docket No.

Transcription

1 Virginia O Neill Vice President, Asst. Chief Compliance Counsel Center for Regulatory Compliance Phone: voneill@aba.com May 6, 2014 By electronic delivery to: Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection Attention: PRA Office 1700 G Street, N.W. Washington, D.C Re: Proposed information collection, Debt Collection Survey from the Consumer Credit Panel, OMB Control No XXXX; Docket No. CFPB Ladies and Gentlemen: The American Bankers Association (ABA) 1 welcomes the opportunity to comment on the proposed information collection by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (Bureau), Debt Collection Survey from the Consumer Credit Panel (Survey). 2 ABA appreciates that the Bureau has sought not to prejudge the regulatory path it should take with respect to debt collection regulation, and that it intends to gather survey data on consumers experiences with debt collection. As we noted in our comments to the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Debt Collection (ANPR), 3 considering the range of issues presented and the fact that the Bureau s policy choices will be felt across the U.S. economy, it is critical that the Bureau develop a complete and robust factual record to inform its policy choices. A carefully designed and executed consumer survey can be one valuable element of such a record and may help the Bureau identify specific debt collection practices and market participants that present the greatest harm to consumers. As proposed, however, the Survey will likely fall short of producing data that can be relied upon to achieve these objectives. In particular, we believe: Its generic inquiry into consumer experiences with debt collection is a missed opportunity to explore the differences between consumer experience with creditors 1 American Bankers Association represents banks of all sizes and charters and is the voice for the nation s $14 trillion banking industry and its two million employees. The majority of ABA s members are banks with less than $185 million in assets Fed. Reg (March 7, 2014). 3 ABA comment letter, dated February 28, 2014, available at

2 collecting their own debt (first-party creditors) and consumer experience with thirdparty debt collectors, significantly different processes which are likely to produce considerably different consumer experiences. The Survey s design and methodology will not produce responsive and verifiable data from which the Bureau can draw accurate conclusions about specific debt collection practices that require regulatory intervention. In order to obtain the most policy value from the Survey, the Bureau should pretest the Survey, evaluate possible shortcomings, and share with stakeholders the results of the pretesting. The Survey should be administered exclusively online in order to maximize response rates, permit the use of prescreening questions, and minimize the potential for response bias and other sources of error. Moreover, the Survey should be more focused and much shorter than 77 questions in order to provide usable information from an ample number and range of participants. ABA believes that value can be derived from surveying consumers if Bureau researchers are committed to transparency and invite public feedback throughout survey planning, execution, and reporting. To that end, we believe the Bureau must articulate clearly the hypotheses that inform its research and invite stakeholder feedback on the adequacy of the proposed Survey questions to produce responsive and verifiable data. In addition, researchers should report transparently on the adequacy of anticipated samples, the potential for bias or error, and most importantly, how each will be managed to ensure the reliability of the data generated. Then, after the Survey has been conducted, we believe a similar commitment to research integrity should inform the publication and discussion of the survey results. The Bureau should provide public access to the data, stripped of personally identifiable information, and invite public feedback on agency findings and policy proposals. Adhering to these standards of transparency and engagement will improve the quality of the Bureau s research, increase public acceptance of it, and further the Dodd-Frank Act s goal of empirically-based consumer protection regulation that does not harm consumers more than it benefits them. As a first step in this process, ABA offers initial comments on the proposed Survey design and methodology. I. Background on the proposed Survey. On March 7, 2014, the Bureau announced its intent to survey consumers to learn about the debt collection system, about consumer experiences with the debt collection system, and about 2

3 how rules for debt collectors might protect consumers without imposing unnecessary burdens on industry. Data collected by the Survey will be used to inform the Bureau s debt collection rulemaking and for other research projects. As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), the Bureau filed with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) an Information Collection Request (ICR) 4 and a copy of the proposed Survey. 5 The ICR describes the Bureau s plan to select a random sample of 10,000 consumers from the Consumer Credit Panel (CCP), a proprietary dataset the CFPB acquired from one of the three national credit reporting agencies. It states: [The CCP] is comprised of a 1-in-48 random sample of all credit records drawn from the credit reporting agency s archive from December The resulting sample includes approximately 5 million de-identified credit records, representing the universe of approximately 240 million credit records. At the end of each calendar quarter, the CFPB receives updated credit records for these sampled consumers (if available) and a 1-in-48 sample of credit records that were newly created since the previous quarter. We plan to randomly select borrowers from the most recent quarter of the CCP to receive a survey. 6 The Bureau will draw the sample, assign it a unique identifier, and inform the credit reporting agency of the selected credit records. The credit reporting agency which has access to the names and addresses of the consumers will mail the survey instrument to consumers. The ICR further explains that the Bureau intends to: [O]versample credit records with recent third-party collections for noncredit-related debts or credit accounts that appear to have entered collections in the recent past. The sample will also include credit records with no evidence of collection activity; among this group, we are considering oversampling credit records with lower credit scores or other indicators that may indicate a greater likelihood of having debt collections that are not reported to the credit reporting agencies. 7 4 Submission to the Office of Management and Budget: CFPB Information Collection Request Debt Collection Survey from the Consumer Credit Panel (OMB Control No.: 3170-XXXX), available at (ICR). 5 The Consumer s Perspective on Debt and Debt Collection: A survey by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to learn about Americans experiences with debt and debt collection, available at (Survey). 6 ICR, supra at Id. 3

4 Consumers will have the option of completing a paper survey or completing the survey online. To encourage consumers to fill it out, the Bureau will include a $5.00 cash payment with each survey. The proposed survey consists of a total of 77 questions, while the exact number of questions a consumer will answer will depend on that individual s response to particular questions and whether the respondent is led to particular follow-on questions. All completed Surveys will be received by the consumer reporting agency, or its subcontractor, who will strip out any personal identifying information, assign a key so that the responses can be matched to the respondent s credit record, and transmit the Survey results to the Bureau. II. The Survey should clearly distinguish between consumer experiences with first-party debt collection activities and those with third-party debt collection activities. In the debt collection ANPR, the Bureau sought input on the basic premise that it should generally seek to harmonize any rules it develops for third-party collectors and first-party collectors, except to the extent that the law, facts, or policy considerations warrant different treatment. 8 We assume that the Bureau has a continuing interest in identifying such facts, yet inexplicably the Survey makes no attempt to distinguish between consumer experiences with first-party creditors and consumer experiences with third-party debt collectors. Instead, the Survey defines a debt collector as, Any person or company trying to collect on a debt even a debt you do not owe. The debt collector could be, for example, the collections department of the original creditor (the person or company you got the loan from or originally owed the debt to), an attorney, a collection firm, or others trying to get you to pay a debt. 9 Throughout, the Survey asks questions about consumer experience with this generic debt collector. This confounding of debtor-experience responses will confuse and undermine the value of the data. As discussed at length in ABA s comment to the ANPR, there are fundamental differences between first-party creditors collecting their own debt and third-party debt collectors. Unlike the relationship between third-party collectors and debtors, the direct lender-borrower relationship is usually a longstanding one, covering the entire lifecycle of a loan, with creditor and borrower already acquainted with each other. The creditor also has strong business incentives to foster the continuing relationship, because in many instances the creditor has a multi-faceted relationship with the consumer. As also expressed in our comment to the ANPR, ABA strongly urges the Bureau to prioritize and sequence its regulatory initiatives, beginning with those issues that present the greatest risk to consumers. Thus, an important goal of the Survey should be to determine the degree to which consumer experiences with first and third-party collection activities differ and to identify those entities and practices that present the most risk of consumer harm. Without clearly identifying 8 78 Fed. Reg , (Nov. 12, 2013) (emphasis added). 9 Survey, supra at 1. 4

5 whether a survey respondent is answering questions about experiences with first-party creditor collection activities or with those of a third-party debt collector, the Bureau will not be able to draw valid conclusions about the need to harmonize any rules it develops for third-party creditors and first-party collectors. Therefore, we urge the Bureau to redesign the Survey to ensure that the data generated distinguish between consumer experiences with collectionrelated activities and communications by first-party creditors and those by third-party debt collectors. In a related vein, the Survey defines the term debts broadly to include [A]ny money you owe, for example, bank loans, student loans, financing from a store or dealer, and past-due bills (such as credit card, medical and utility bills). 10 Thus, Survey questions probing consumer experiences make no distinction between the categories of debt in collection, despite the fact that the kind of debt being collected may affect significantly a consumer s response to a question. For example, due to the complexity of medical bills as well as many phone, utility, and cable bills it may be harder for a consumer to be certain that the amount due is correct. In addition, a consumer s experience with medical debt collection may be more emotionally charged than those related to other kinds of collection, resulting in more negative responses to collection-related communications than is the case with other categories of debt in collection. Therefore, ABA believes that the survey responses must identify and be sorted according to the category of debt in collection if the Bureau wishes to have responses that point clearly to genuine issues requiring regulatory action. To achieve this level of validity, the Survey should include screening questions to identify, and sort into appropriate samples, the type of entity collecting the debt first-party creditor or third-party debt collector and the category of debt being collected. Moreover, the Survey methodology must seek to maximize the likelihood that there will be an adequate sample of respondents who have had experience with first-party creditor collections. Thus, in addition to oversampling consumers with low credit scores, we urge the Bureau to oversample consumers whose credit report shows that they were thirty days late with a payment, but may not show further delinquency. Similarly, to increase the likelihood that there are adequate samples for each category of debt being collected, the Bureau should seek to identify, and oversample, consumers whose credit report shows a particular category of debt in collection, i.e., credit card, auto, medical, utility, etc. ABA believes that only by identifying the degree to which consumer experience with first and third-party collection activities differ, and precisely identifying those practices that present the most risk of consumer harm, can regulations be appropriately calibrated to protect consumers without imposing unnecessary burdens on consumers and on the industries that provide the services that they seek. 10 Survey, supra at 1. 5

6 III. The Survey should be designed to identify and manage potential response bias. The ICR states that the Bureau anticipates a 34% response rate, 11 an estimate significantly higher than survey response rates over the last decade. Survey researchers across the United States have witnessed a gradual decrease in survey participation over time. 12 The Pew Research Center reported that response rates for its public opinion polls have dropped from 36% in 1997 to between 5 and 15% today. 13 The American Association of Public Opinion Research reports that most surveys of an organization s own members only have response rates of around 20%. 14 In light of these trends, ABA believes that the Bureau may be significantly over-estimating the anticipated response rate. We recognize that survey research is an important tool for understanding markets and identifying problems that may suggest regulatory intervention. Today s lower response rates do not call for abandonment of the research tool, but they demand careful advance planning to estimate expected response rates at the segment level (i.e., those with first-party collections experience) and for particular survey questions to determine whether there will be an adequate sample to permit the researchers to draw reliable conclusions from the data. To the extent that this analysis suggests that response rates may be too low to permit researchers to read the data, researchers should consider and disclose to interested stakeholders plans to increase participation among targeted respondents. Moreover, consideration of response rates demands careful analysis of whether the survey sample is reliably representative of the general public, or whether respondents with particular experiences may be expected to respond in disproportionate numbers. For example, the Bureau bases its response rate estimate, in part, on the response rate received by the continuation survey of the National Survey of Mortgage Borrowers (National Mortgage Survey). That survey, which remains in the field, intentionally oversampled consumers who were delinquent on their mortgages and has had a response rate to date of 33%. 15 ABA believes that the National Mortgage Survey s response rate like that anticipated for the debt collection Survey may indicate the presence of significant response bias. Consumers who are behind on their mortgage may demonstrate a greater propensity to complete the National Mortgage Survey than would the population as a whole. Similarly, consumers who may have had a 11 ICR, supra at National Research Council, Nonresponse in Social Science Surveys: A Research Agenda, Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press (2013). 13 VerstaResearch, Do Response Rates Really Matter? (June 2009) available at ; Pew Research Center for the People & the Press: Our Survey Methodology in Detail, available at 14 Id. 15 ICR supra at 13. 6

7 negative experience with debt collection may be more likely to respond to a survey on debt collection being conducted by the new federal agency charged with consumer protection than would be the case for the underlying population, raising legitimate questions about the representative nature of Survey responses. In light of this possibility, ABA believes the Bureau should acknowledge the risk of response bias within the sample and amend the Survey design and methodology to identify and minimize this potential source of error. The Survey should include questions designed to measure optimism so that response bias can be identified and any affected responses can be appropriately weighted in order to promote data quality. In addition, we urge the Bureau to use the credit record information to compare the demographic characteristics of respondents and nonrespondents in order to identify any other potential bias. Finally, research integrity calls for transparency in reporting about the data. Published studies should avoid reporting only descriptive statistics. Rather, the studies should report on the data collected, clearly identifying the number of responses to particular questions, and any potential for bias that may discount the reliability and representative nature of those responses. IV. The Bureau should pretest Survey questions. The choice of words and phrases used in a question is critical in expressing the meaning and intent of the question and ensuring that all respondents interpret it the same way. Even small wording differences can substantially affect the answers people provide. The ICR states, The clearance includes pre-testing the questionnaires to ensure the collection of reliable information while minimizing respondent burden and costs. For example, the Bureau may use cognitive interviewing or pretesting to gauge the effectiveness of the survey questions and whether respondents understand each question. 16 It is unclear from this statement whether the Bureau does in fact intend to pretest the Survey, but ABA strongly urges it to do so to evaluate the clarity of Survey questions and to detect potential problems in the Survey design. Proposed Survey question 15 demonstrates the need for pretesting; it asks, People may pay a debt that they are uncertain is theirs or that they do not remember borrowing. Which of the following best describes how certain you were about whether this debt was yours? 17 First, we believe that the introductory sentence should be deleted. Research shows that questions that presuppose something yield low quality data and tend to annoy respondents, as the assumptions are perceived as leading. A more fundamental problem with this question, however, is its generality, which may lead to significant differences in the way consumers interpret and answer the question. For example, some respondents may know that they owe the creditor, but be uncertain that the amount due is correct. Others may also know that they 16 ICR, supra at Survey, supra at 4. 7

8 have a past due debt, but they may not recognize the name of the entity collecting the debt. Finally, there may be some respondents who were the victim of fraud or identity theft that truly were uncertain that they owed the debt in collection. In all three cases, consumers could be unsure how to answer the question, and their responses would have vastly different meanings that would not be reflected by the aggregate response data. By pretesting the Survey, this ambiguity would more likely be identified and resolved, ensuring the collection of more reliable information that pinpoints the source of consumer confusion. We encourage the Bureau to test the Survey on a small subset of the target respondents for example, consumers who have had debts in collection within the last 12-months not the general public. In addition, in the interest of transparency, we urge the Bureau to share with stakeholders the results of the pretesting and any subsequent changes made to the Survey prior to resubmitting it to the Office of Management and Budget for the final PRA clearance. V. The Survey should be conducted exclusively online. ABA urges the Bureau to reconsider its proposal to offer consumers the option of completing the Survey either on paper or online. Although we recognize that there are advantages and disadvantages to both methods of data collection, we believe that the complexity, length, and design of the Survey make it better suited for web-based administration. The proposed Survey consists of 77 questions, which in the print version span a daunting fourteen pages. This fact alone is likely to depress response rates. Although the print version directs the respondent to skip certain questions, this is not immediately obvious, and many respondents may look only at the length of the survey and discard it. In addition, the survey logic is so difficult to follow on paper that it may further discourage response rates as consumers may choose to give up mid-survey rather than struggle to figure out what questions they are to answer. The complex survey logic may also increase the error rates of paper-based survey responses. An online survey, in contrast, allows advanced survey logic to be used, which minimizes confusion and permits faster progression through the survey. Its programmed skips also prevent the error introduced by a respondent s failure to follow the survey logic correctly. Second, an online survey allows the randomization of question order and answer options, so bias can be reduced. Research shows that answers to questions may be affected by questions that precede them. While presenting questions in a variable order to respondents, an online survey can help ensure that each question still gets asked in the same context. Although this does not eliminate the potential impact of previous questions on the current question, it does minimize the negative effect of the bias by spreading it randomly across all of the questions. The same principle applies to the order of response options in a single question. An online 8

9 survey permits the researcher to randomize the order in which the answer choices are presented. Thus, any affect that the order of the answer choices has on responses is spread randomly across the options. In addition, by randomizing answer options, biased results due to respondents always clicking the first choice can be avoided. Third, web-based administration of a survey offers the opportunity to prescreen respondents. As discussed in section II above, the inclusion of prescreening questions will permit researchers to identify and sort respondents into appropriate samples. Online administration of survey questions also permits survey questions to be appropriately tailored to probe that respondent s experience i.e., with first-party creditor or third-party debt collections or regarding a particular category of debt being collected. Fourth, web-based design capabilities offer greater formatting flexibility, permitting attention to be drawn to important matters. For example, one section of the Survey asks a set of questions about a consumer s most recent debt collection, and there are directions at the beginning of the section that explain, These questions refer to the debt that a debt collector contacted you about most recently (emphasis in original). 18 That section, however, includes fourteen questions covering three pages of the paper-based survey. As respondents progress through the questions, they may forget the singular focus of the questions. Used correctly, formatting options such as pop-up text boxes can remind respondents of important directions to promote the responsiveness and accuracy of the data. Finally, there are efficiencies to be gained from an online survey. The ICR states that paper surveys will be returned to the consumer reporting agency or its subcontractor who will electronically scan them and convert the responses to an electronic format that will be sent to the Bureau using a secure FTP server. 19 Obviously, these intermediate steps are avoided by online administration of the survey, and although the use of an electronic scanner avoids keypunch error that often results from paper surveys, electronic scanners are not error free. In sum, ABA believes the advantages of an online survey overwhelmingly call for web-based administration of the debt collection Survey. We recognize that the Bureau s proposal to offer respondents the opportunity to complete the Survey either on paper or online is intended to ensure that data are collected from respondents who lack online access. 20 However, the number of people with Internet access in the United States has increased significantly in recent 18 See Survey, supra at ICR, supra at Another problem for the Bureau s proposal to offer both paper and online access is that transparency and research integrity standards would call for data analysis that identifies the demographic differences in those who complete the survey using the different modes and its impact on the resulting data, further complicating the task for the Bureau and undermining its efforts. 9

10 years. Census Bureau statistics report that in 2012, 74.8% of Americans had Internet access at home. 21 Moreover, by optimizing the Survey website for mobile access, the Bureau could further promote a representative cross sampling. After all, 58% of American adults have a smartphone, including 53% of American adults earning less than $50,000 annually and 47% of those earning less than $30,000 per year. 22 VI. General comments on Survey questions. In the interest of clarity, we have provided our comments to specific Survey questions on the Survey instrument (attached). In addition, we offer the following general comments: 1. The Survey asks respondents to answer questions about their debt collection experience over the past two years. Recall bias and the extent to which it undermines the reliability of self-reported data is a concern that ABA believes should be mitigated by limiting the recall period to debt collection experiences that occurred within the last 12 months. 2. Survey answers should include the choice I don t know or I don t recall where appropriate. The inclusion of this choice can have a significant effect on responses as there are always a number of respondents who are ambivalent about the alternatives presented to them. 3. Survey answers that offer three choices should be expanded to offer at least five choices. A selection of three choices tends to bias the response because respondents tend to select the middle choice. Unless respondents have very strong feelings about a subject, the middle option provides an easy answer rather than an accurate response. By including five choices, the middle response bias can be reduced. VII. Comments on specific Survey questions. Question # 1: It is recommended that surveys begin with simple questions that respondents will find interesting and engaging in order to motivate the respondent to complete the survey. Question #1 may discourage completion of the Survey as it asks about what may be considered a sensitive topic, whether over the past year the respondent has spent more than his income, about the same, or less than his income. This question should be asked later in the Survey. 21 United States Census Bureau, Measuring America: Computer & Internet Trends in America , available at 22 Pew Research Internet Project: Mobile Technology Fact Sheet (January 2014) available at 10

11 Questions # 2-6: These questions appear to be intended to measure optimism. We believe these questions should be moved to the end of the Survey, just before the section collecting demographic information. Question # 8: Consumers may not always be aware of the laws about debts and of their options, for example, to dispute a debt. How familiar would you say you are about each of the following? Rephrase the introductory sentence of this question from a negative lead to a more neutral statement such as, Consumers have access to a variety of information about debts and of their options, for example, to dispute a debt. How familiar would you say you are about each of the following? The choice of answers should be increased from three to five. Question # 10: Add the choice I don t recall. Question # 11: This question asks respondents whether any of the debts they have been contacted about were debts they did not owe or for which the creditor was seeking the wrong amount. Without verifying the accuracy of the responses, the Bureau cannot use the responses to draw conclusions about the frequency with which debt collectors attempt to collect debts that are not owed or are an incorrect amount. Question # 14: Thinking about the most recent debt you paid after being contacted, which of the following best describe the most important reason or reasons you paid this debt? Check the most important reason or reasons. (emphasis in original) It is unclear whether respondents are to check one or more reason. If the latter, the directions should instruct the respondent to rank the top three reasons, assuming they have more than one reason i.e., #1, #2, #3. (Note: if the Survey is conducted online, respondents may be prevented from providing more than the requested number of reasons so errors can be avoided.) The list of reasons should be randomized to avoid bias. Question # 15: See the discussion about this question on page 7, infra. Question # 17: Thinking of the most recent instance when you did not pay a debt despite being contacted by a debt collector, which of the following best describes the most important reason or reasons you did not pay the debt? Check the most important reason or reasons. (emphasis in original) 11

12 It is unclear whether respondents are to check one or more reason. If the latter, the directions should instruct the respondent to rank the top three reasons, assuming they have more than one reason i.e., #1, #2, #3. The list of reasons should be randomized to avoid bias. Questions # 18 23: Add the choice I don t recall. Question # 24: Consider the most recent time in which you thought about asking a debt collector to stop contacting you but then did not. Which of the following best describes the main reason you did not ask the debt collector to stop contacting you? Check one reason. Add to the list of possible responses, I did not feel it was necessary to ask the debt collector to stop contacting me. The list of responses should be randomized to avoid bias. Question # 25: Expand the response options from 3 to 5, adding extremely helpful and I don t know/have an opinion. Randomize both the list of items being considered and the response options. Questions # 26-27: Delete responses that refer to a time period of more than 12 months ago. Question # 29: Delete the option other or unknown type of debt collector; instead add a column I Don t know. Question # 30-34: This series of questions relates to your most recent debt collection i.e., the debt a respondent has been contacted about most recently. However, the instructions are provided four questions earlier and on the top of the prior page. It is important to remind the respondent of these instructions. Question # 32: Add the choice, I don t know. Question # 33: Add the choices, I don t know and Less than once a month. In addition, we note that collections-related contact is an inherently stressful event; therefore, there is a significant risk that responses to a question about the frequency of contact will be subject to recall bias. Respondents may overstate the frequency of first-party creditor or debt collector contact. We believe that research integrity standards require the Bureau to acknowledge this potential source of bias when reporting on the data. Moreover, we note that the Bureau has a number of tools available to it to gather data, and we urge the Bureau to use the tool that is most likely to produce objective and verifiable data. In this case, a horizontal review of first- 12

13 party creditor and debt collector call records could be undertaken to determine the frequency of collection-related contact. Question # 36: The list of answers should be randomized to avoid bias. The choice of responses should be increased from three to five. Question # 37: To your knowledge, has this debt collector ever contacted a friend, coworker, or family member other than your spouse as part of trying to collect this debt? Do not include instances in which the person contacted was a co-signer. Question # 38: (If yes to 37) Did this debt collector contact the person to do any of the following? Yes /No Ask the person how to locate you Discuss your debt with the person Ask the person to pay your debt Other: Don t know We urge the Bureau to delete questions # 37 and 38 as they require respondents to answer questions about which they have no personal knowledge. The answers would be inherently unreliable. Question # 40: People sometimes dispute a debt, for example, by telling the debt collector that the debt is not theirs or contesting the amount that is to be collected. In the past two years, since [September 2012], have you disputed a debt with a debt collector? The recall period should only be one year. Add the choice I don t recall. Question # 42: Add a column I don t know/recall. Question # 46: Add the choices I don t recall and Disputed through a third-party. 13

14 Question # 47: Add a column I don t recall. Add the response choice, Responded satisfactorily; provided additional information. Question #49: Add a column I don t recall. Randomize both the list of items being considered and the response options. Questions # 50-53: As the Bureau is aware, debt collection claims are filed in state and local courts, and the administration and practice of those courts on all subjects not entrusted to the Federal Government is the exclusive province and duty of the State Legislatures. 23 We do not believe that an already lengthy survey should be extended to ask questions on matters over which the Bureau has no authority. Furthermore, undertaking an incomplete inquiry into a debtor s experience with the judicial process surrounding collection can only lead to misuse or misinterpretation of the limited information sought from the proposed question. Asking why someone chooses not to attend a hearing without asking the survey population about when they did attend, whether they were represented, what experience they had, what the results were and whether they evaluated the process as affording them their day in court illustrates how biased the limited inquiry really is. Consequently, we oppose the Bureau s inclusion of this area of inquiry and urge them to delete questions Question # 54: Distinguish between residential and cell phones. In a separate question, ask respondents to rank the top three most effective ways to reach them. (This will provide insight into whether a respondent s preferred means of being contacted is also the most effective means to reach that person.) Question # 55: Add a column I don t know. Question # 56: The choice of responses should be increased from three to five. Question # 57: Add a column I don t know. VIII. Conclusion ABA appreciates the opportunity to comment on the proposed Survey. We look forward to working with the Bureau to maximize the reliability, effectiveness, and transparency of the data 23 Calder v. Bull, 3 U.S. 386, 387 (1798). 14

15 collection. If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned at or Sincerely, Virginia O'Neill Vice President, Assistant Chief Compliance Counsel 15