§443B-3 Registration required.

435 words·~2 min read·/hi/443b-3

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

(a)No collection agency shall collect or attempt to collect any money or any other forms of indebtedness alleged to be due and owing from any person who resides or does business in this State without first registering under this chapter.

(b)Registration shall include:

(1)Submission of a complete application for registration;

(2)Submission of a certificate of good standing or a certificate of authority from the business registration division;

(3)Payment of appropriate fees;

(4)Filing and maintenance of a bond in the amount prescribed in section 443B-5;

(5)Maintenance of a regular active business office in the State; and

(6)Designation of a principal collector, as prescribed in section 443B-6.

(c)Any collection agency which has filed a bond with the director and maintained that bond in full force and effect, and which has not filed an application and paid the registration fee within ninety days of June 6, 1987, shall submit an application in the same manner as a new applicant subject to the provisions of sections 443B-4 and 443B-6. [L 1987, c 191, pt of §1; am L 1990, c 246, §5; am L 1996, c 13, §12]

Case Notes

Where defendant debt collector originally brought suit against plaintiff to recover an alleged debt, and plaintiff then brought a class action against defendant for allegedly unlawfully collecting debts, district court denied defendant's motion for summary judgment. Defendant claimed that an email from the department of commerce and consumer affairs

(DCCA)showed that defendant was not a collection agency under state law and, thus, not required to register with the DCCA. However, the email also stated that the DCCA did not provide legal advice or legal interpretations and that, if defendant believed it was exempt from registering, burden of proof was on defendant to show that registration was not necessary. 475 F. Supp. 3d 1119 (2020).

Although plaintiffs were "consumers" within the meaning of §§480-1 and 480-13, plaintiffs' payment of their Hawaii medical services association

(HMSA)lien to the Kentucky-based company that contracted with HMSA to provide subrogation and "claims recovery services", but which had violated this section, did not constitute an injury for which plaintiffs could bring suit under §480-13(b). 117 H. 153, 177 P.3d 341 (2008).

Kentucky-based company that contracted with the Hawaii medical services association

(HMSA)to provide subrogation and "claims recovery services" was a "collection agency" within the meaning of §443B-1, and subject to the registration requirements of this section, where company was collecting "claims" that HMSA had against plaintiffs--money that company alleged was "due and owing". 117 H. 153, 177 P.3d 341 (2008).