In Group One Development, Inc., v. Bankof Lake Mills, et. al. 2017 WL 2937709, at *3 (S.D.Tex., 2017), Judge Lake held that a commercial debt did not trigger the FDCPA.
Plaintiffs allege that they are “consumers” and that defendant Fora is a “debt collector” as defined by the FDCPA
. Fora argues, however, that the debt at issue is not a “debt” as defined by the statute. The FDCPA
defines “debt” as “any obligation or alleged obligation of a consumer to pay money arising out of a transaction in which the money, property, insurance, or services which are the subject of the transaction are primarily for personal, family, or household purposes ….” 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(5). Plaintiffs do not allege that the transaction at issue was primarily for personal, family, or household purposes. And the Agreement states that “Borrower certifies that the Loan proceeds will be used for business purposes only and will not be used for personal, family or household purposes
.” The court therefore concludes that the obligation is not a “debt” under the FDCPA
, that the cited FDCPA
provisions do not apply, and that Plaintiffs’ FDCPA
claims therefore fail as a matter of law.