April 12, 2001
In the Matter of the Petition by
SALVADOR CRUZ
7726 Mango Avenue
at
Fontana, CA 92336-2610
P.S. Docket No. AO 01-48
APPEARANCE FOR PETITIONER:
Salvador Cruz
7726 Mango Avenue
Fontana, CA 92336-2610
APPEARANCE FOR RESPONDENT:
Peter Henry, Esq.
Employment & Labor Law
United States Postal Service
475 L'Enfant Plaza, SW, Room 6414
Washington, DC 20260-1137
INITIAL DECISION
Petitioner, Salvador Cruz, a former employee of the Postal Service, filed a "Petition for Hearing Under the Debt Collection Act" after receiving a number of letters from a collection agency seeking payment of certain debts the Postal Service claims it is owed by Petitioner.
The Postal Service regulations that address Respondent’s collection of a debt from payments otherwise due a former employee, such as his retirement annuity, appear in Part 966 of Title 39, Code of Federal Regulations. Under those procedures, before taking action to collect a debt by instituting involuntary deductions from the former employee’s retirement payments, Respondent must give Petitioner notice and an opportunity for a hearing. The process is to be initiated by issuance of a Notice by the Postal Service Accounting Service Center informing the former employee of the alleged debt and of his right to request reconsideration by the person who was his postmaster or installation head when the debt was incurred. 39 C.F.R. §966.4(a)(2). If the employee requests reconsideration and is not satisfied with the reconsideration decision, he has 30 days from receipt of the written reconsideration decision to file a petition for a hearing. 39 C.F.R. §966.4 (a)(3) and (b). As there is no evidence that this procedure has been followed, Petitioner is not entitled to a hearing under 39 C.F.R. Part 966.
There is also no evidence that Respondent intends to make deductions from Petitioner’s retirement annuity. Were Respondent to take such action without first following the steps described above, Petitioner would generally be entitled to a hearing. However, Respondent’s employment of the collection agency is not equivalent to making involuntary deductions from Petitioner’s retirement and does not entitle him to a hearing under 39 C.F.R. Part 966. Under the provisions included on the reverse of the collection letters, Petitioner may dispute the debts and by writing to the collection agency can stop further such collection efforts:
"IF YOU NOTIFY US IN WRITING THAT (I) YOU WISH
US TO CEASE CONTACT WITH YOU BY TELEPHONE
AT YOUR RESIDENCE OR PLACE OF EMPLOYMENT,
THEN NO SUCH FURTHER CONTACT BY
TELEPHONE SHALL BE MADE; (II) YOU REFUSE TO
PAY A DEBT OR WISH US TO CEASE FURTHER
COMMUNICATION WITH YOU, THEN WE SHALL NOT
COMMUNICATE FURTHER WITH YOU WITH
RESPECT TO SUCH DEBT, EXCEPT FOR A WRITTEN
COMMUNICATION (A) TO ADVISE YOU THAT OUR
FURTHER EFFORTS ARE BEING TERMINATED;
(B) TO NOTIFY YOU THAT WE OR THE CREDITOR
MAY INVOKE SPECIFIED REMEDIES WHICH ARE
ORDINARILY INVOKED BY US OR THE CREDITOR,
(C) WHERE APPLICABLE, TO NOTIFY YOU THAT WE
OR THE CREDITOR INTEND TO INVOKE A
SPECIFIED REMEDY PERMITTED BY LAW. IF YOUR
WRITTEN NOTICE CONCERNING (I) AND/OR (II)
ABOVE IS MADE BY MAIL, NOTIFICATION SHALL BE
COMPLETE UPON OUR RECEIPT. IF YOU ORALLY
INFORM US OF (I) AND/OR (II) ABOVE, WE SHALL
ADVISE YOU THAT SUCH COMMUNICATION MUST
BE MADE IN WRITING. THE INFORMATION
CONTAINED IN THIS PARAGRAPH IS REQUIRED TO
APPEAR IN OUR INITIAL WRITTEN COMMUNICATION
WITH YOU.
NOTE: THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS NOT
INTENDED TO BE A COMPLETE LIST OF RIGHTS
CONSUMERS MAY HAVE UNDER STATE AND
FEDERAL LAW."
By Order dated February 12, 2001, Petitioner was advised that his Petition was subject to dismissal on the above grounds. He was provided an opportunity to object but has not done so. For the reasons discussed above, this Petition is dismissed. The dismissal does not prevent Petitioner from filing a new petition if at some time in the future Respondent initiates the appropriate process described above or if Respondent causes involuntary deductions to be made from Petitioner’s retirement. Respondent is precluded from initiating withholdings without first following the steps described above as set forth in 39 C.F.R. §966.4.
Norman D. Menegat Administrative Judge