EDITORIAL REBUTTAL
Our initial editorial titled “Santander Demands CARS Certification – The Contingent Fee Contradiction” we addressed the issue of Santander/Chrysler demanding that all of their approximate 700 agencies be CARS Certified. Despite our extreme efforts to distance any blame on RISC, CARS or Joe Taylor, Stamatis Ferrolis or Mark Lacek, all of their editorial responses focused solely upon their defense. It seems like either they all miss the point or perhaps they agree with us and just can’t say it?
Read More!
Tim,
I couldn’t agree with you more on the need for state certification and licensing as we have in California, Illinois and Florida. These are model systems, while not perfect, they provide common standards and requirements that ALL agencies should operate under. If these were adopted in all the other states and enforced, the industry would be weeded out of a lot of “bush league” agencies that saturate the market creating undue downward price pressure.
That said, I believe, it is the industry itself that should dictate which compliance programs are valid and not a lender who has no regard for the sustainability and safety of the industry.
I agree with you!
Thank you,
Kevin
Kevin, while I have no right to speak for any of the mentioned names. The rebuttals, as I see them, are not that CARS was personally attacked nor were any of the persons personally attacked in the original article. Nor is there any argument about not wanting to accept any additional non-compensated terms from clients. The rebuttals are valid while they are sided to RISC. They are valid in the reasoning that for once a big evil, if you will, is defending the professional service of repossession by demanding a level playing field of knowledge with a certification. The company I work for will only accept CARS certification for employees, it is their decision to make all employees learn from the same schooling. If any of us have an issue with anything we can make one phone call or one email to get an answer that relates to our company and our laws.
Now, that is not why you wrote this. You wrote this as a big evil, is placing uncompensated demands on the industry, again. We are all sick of accepting or rejecting these demands. We ALL understand that you have a great and valid point in your article. As I see the rebuttals and the points that were made, while they did seem defensive and sales oriented, were showing everyone that this is what the big evil is demanding, Joe listed things covered under the course and stated why they are in the course. The take away was to, as I see it, show people what this big evil was demanding. I work in Illinois, I must be certified by a course provider and by the IL ICC, finger prints run through state and FBI background checks, YEARLY! or I do not get a permit to work.
While the people named did put their thoughts out there and because they are named to Santander, they were correct in not saying what I will below.
My take to the rebuttals: This is not one of “NO” things you want to make a stand on. There are so many other things to say no to but not when they are requiring a high standard such as a quality certification. This industry needs this standard self applied anyways and a couple other standards like mandatory background checks, mandatory classes on business and personal ethics, for both the big evils’ and agents and let’s throw in some good ole fashion couth!. If we reduce the bad choice employee with good solid choice employees, the industry will start to clean up its image. This in itself allows the natural price to increase and insurance to level, they never decrease. Supply and demand creates this and who in their right mind wants to send their certified and clean agents out for pennies. Many good companies have suffered from the decisions of the bad companies/employees. While the bad are still allowed to be a Billy the Kid in this industry we will all feel the big evils’ laugh as they demand more for less. When an assignment is rejected, big evil will find someone that will take it. Let’s make it harder by letting them write themselves to increases such as this one.
Just my opinion!