Mr. HOLLAND. One further charge that was made yesterday and I might say this is the only charge that I have heard here in the District that specifically mentioned Credit Advisors, which, as I said, is the name under which we operate here.

Yesterday it was stated in testimony by one of your witnesses that one of our clients, a Credit Advisors client, stopped making payments to us and we sued him. I want to emphatically state that in our ten years of corporate history we have never sued any client. I make that emphatically. We have never sued any of our clients. I would request that Mr. Kneipp present to this committee the evidence he has that we have filed suit against any of our clients.

I have said before that we choose to represent the debtor. I don't believe on one hand we can sit here and say that we represent him and that we are trying to help him and as soon as he stops making payments to us we turn around and sue him. I think it would be unconscionable. That is our firm corporate policy. I would like to erase from the minds of anyone here that we would sue one of our clients.

In that connection he used the name Credit Advisors. That name has been used by other people in the industry. Quite a bit of conversation was held here yesterday on the case of Ferguson vs. Skrupa. Mr. Skrupa has, upon occasion, used the name "Credit Advisor" but not in the District to my knowledge. I emphasize there is no such client. Mr. Kniepp has no such information. If he does, I would like for him to present it here.

Another thing I would like to say is that it has been said that we favor certain creditors. I don't know where that idea arose in the minds of anyone connected with the industry. We cannot favor any creditor. It would be foreign to our nature to favor any creditor. We must favor our debtor. We must do what we must do to help the debtor out of debt.

The only time I have seen any favoring of debtors done in the debt management industry is where debt management is operated on a nonprofit basis. I think one of the statements that has been submitted to this committee is by Mr. Price A. Patton. Mr. Patton was the Director of the largest non-profit counselling service in the country, namely, in the City of Chicago. Mr. Patton, in testimony before the Tydings Committee of the Senate, said the originally this non-profit corporation was set up with the help of such individuals as Marshall Field in Chicago and that the creditors were to take a minority interest in this operation. But, as they began to open up and operate and seek clients, the creditors became very much a pressure group; they took control of it to a large degree, and what would occur is that the creditors would send certain of their debtors over and by sending them over to the non-profit organization for counselling service, they are merely saying, "We would like to be favored on your disbursements." But, as far as a commercial debt counsellor is concerned, he would never favor a creditor.

To go further, sir, as far as the charges are concerned that have been made against the industry, I would like to state that Congressman Diggs introduced his bill-and I believe it is because in the State of Michigan, which is the state he represents, there is licensing for the debt management industry. The same charges that are made here today were made in 1958 and the congress took a look at the debt management industry in 1958 and they didn't take any action.

In 1963, when Mr. Diggs introduced a similiar bill, congress again didn't take action. At that point Michigan had had one full year of experience under the Debt Managment Act and I can say that that is probably one of the contributing factors to Mr. Diggs taking the approach of licensing as opposed to prohibition.

Here agin we sit in 1967 and yet in the District there has never been a true investigation of how reputable counsellors operate and of the great need for their services.

I would like to ask the debtor, our client, the consumer, the person who we help, what his opinion is.

I would like to submit as an exhibit (Exhibit 2) to this committee copies of over 125 letters we received at the time of unfavorable publicity last spring, some of them solicited, some unsoliciated, from our clients. I think these letters are testimony from people who live right here of how they feel about our organization and about the help we have been able to extend to them and how they feel about their own debt picture.

I would like to submit this to your committee, sir.

Mr. SISK. Without objection, a copy of your Exhibit No. 2 will be made available for the file and subject to inspection by the committee. If possible, it will become a part of the record.

(The material referred to will be found in the files of the committee.)

Mr. HOLLAND. The debtor is the one for whom these hearings are convened and I think he should be the one to finally determine whether this industry is of need and service to the economy.

I thank you, sir.

Mr. SISK. Thank you, Mr. Holland, for keeping your statement so brief.

As I said, your full statement will be made a part of the record. (The prepared statement follows:)

STATEMENT OF ELLIOTT HOLLAND, GENERAL MANAGER, BARDEN INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT CORPORATION

Introduction

I appreciate this opportunity to appear before this Subcommittee on H.R. 8929 and H.R. 9806. My name is Elliott Holland, and I am the General Manager of the Barden group of companies. We operate 56 debt counselling offices in the District of Columbia and elsewhere throughout the country under the Credit Advisors and other trade names. I hope my testimony can show this Subcommittee how professional debt counsellors help so many people bogged down in debt. I testify from daily experience in this industry. We know from working with thousands of debtors that they need our services and that they obtain a practical course in financial planning as we help them out of debt. Our actual experience disproves the many unfounded charges made against the debt management industry. Essential Questions to be Answered

This Subcommittee should obtain answers to the following essential questions as it investigates this industry: What role do professional debt management companies play in our economy? Are their services useful, and do they satisfy a need? What are the alternatives to debt counsellors presently, and what are the alternatives if commercial debt management were to be outlawed? Do non-profit organizations fairly represent the debtors, and can they alone serve the needs of those in debt? How do responsible commercial counsellors operate in this field? How can the public best be protected from the abuses which have occurred in the past? Do the facts support the charges leveled against the industry? Which abuses are real, and which charges are unfounded?

Debt Counselling-A Definition

Debt counselling has resulted from the phenomenal growth in consumer credit—a credit expansion which has contributed dynamically to the growth of our free enterprise system, but unfortunately has left in its wake large numbers of victims to such easy credit policies. This body of overburdened debtors can be accounted for in a number of ways. Most debtors are buyers with little or no sales resistance. They buy far beyond their means and their abilities to pay. They are victims of easy credit policies. Still others make purchases in good faith, but because of illness, death, loss of employment or some other unforeseen personal catastrophe are unable to meet their contracted payments.

Regardless of the reason for default, each class of debtor faces a variety of pressures, such as demanding telephone calls, written and persistent duns, garnishment, the threat of unemployment. As these pressures mount, debtors often find that the principal solutions are: bankruptcy * or professional debt counselling and management.

Debt management companies are not loan companies. Fully qualified and capably trained debt management counsellors have only one objective: To guide persons in debt out of the maze of money troubles in which they have trapped themselves.

We think that the facts, when known, clearly establish the usefulness of professional debt counsellors and the need for their services. The United States Department of Labor stated in several 1966 reports: "If honestly operated, these agencies can perform a real service for persons deeply enmeshed in debt." That, of course, is not the entire quote-for the reports go on to warn of the serious abuses that have occurred in the debt management industry. The concern for these abuses is a concern the industry shares, and has prompted these hearings today. I will address myself to such problems, and the solution to them, later. For now, let us consider the "real service" which my company and other reputable ones in the debt counselling field performs.