Controversy generated the aggression suffered by a young man by a worker at a collection company who went to his home to report on the debt.
Francisco Jorquera, a victim of violence, told CHV that after not being able to pay the nearly 300,000 pesos he owes, he began receiving constant phone calls from that company, until an official arrived at the young man’s home and tried to beat him when chred to sign the notification document. All this was recorded in the security cameras of the home.
Credit: CHV News
Remittance, the company to which the accused worker belonged, noted that what happened “is not part of the protocol and procedures of our company and is not identified with the spirit of work of our company”, so they initiated an internal summary that resulted in the disengagement of the alleged perpetrator.
Along with reporting that, they explained that the subject was not a collector, but that “a ‘domicile checker, who does not know the debt of the young person”, an action that is taken “when the debtor is undeniable, as in this case and in the event that in the future there is legal action, thus preventing third parties from being harmed, in the event of any embargoes or legal action”.
“In the case in question, all protocols and procedures were complied with, domicile verified, the address registered by the student was attended, during business day and time, asking directly for him, to personally inform him of the existence of a debt. This action is due to the that it was never possible to contact him by telephone, there is a record of it,” they add.
Without prejudice to the foregoing, the company felt that “nothing justifies acts of violence, which we repudiate and attribute to a personal problem that could be generated among those involved at the time of the visit”.
From the company they also ensured that they contacted the student to deliver the corresponding apologies and that the cost of the overdue debt will be assumed.
“As a company we understand and are empathetic to the situation we live in today as a country and how the crisis is affecting people,” they said.
Office home of studies
Due to this incident, Superintendent Jorge Avilés ordered the institution to submit in a maximum of five business days “the copy of the contract for the provision of services concluded between the university and the collection company involved; then a report containing the actions taken by the institution, to know the details of the above incident, and to prevent this from happening in the future, because it could affect another student.”
“Finally, the detail of the actions carried out by the institution, in order to internalize in the situation of the student concerned, and of the accompanying and protective measures that have been provided for the benefit of him,” he added.
UNAB, meanwhile, defended himself by ensuring that any collection management is carried by external companies, such as Remittance, and that in this particular case, “we want to be angry in pointing out that respect for our students and any member of our community is a fundamental part of the institution and its values, so we categorically reject any procedure contrary to these principles , which may have been carried out by the external undertaking”.
“Given the above, the University has made the decision to end the contractual relationship with the collection company Remesa and is evaluating all corresponding legal actions to prevent situations like these from happening again,” adds his statement, where they add that they made the legal support team available to the affected student.
