In Heredia v. Capital Mgmt. Servs., L.P., No. 19-1296, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 33444, at *4 (7th Cir. Nov. 8, 2019), the Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit held that a debt collector's reference to the possibility of issuing a 1099-C was materially misleading, at the pleadings stage. The language at the crux of this lawsuit is the part… Read More
In Koehler v. Waypoint Res. Grp., No. 8:18-cv-2071-T-60AAS, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 191438 (M.D. Fla. Nov. 5, 2019), the District Court held that a debt collector’s reporting of a cable bill to the CRAs did not trigger the FDCPA. All of Koehler's FDCPA claims are based on Waypoint's error in reporting the original creditor as "Charter Communications" rather than "Bright… Read More
In Tuck v. Portfolio Recovery Assocs., No. 19-CV-1270-CAB-AHG, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 179274, at *9 (S.D. Cal. Oct. 16, 2019), Judge Bencivengo dismissed a TCPA and FDCPA claim for failure of proper pleading. First, she dismissed the TCPA claim. To "make" a call under the TCPA the person must either (1) directly make the call, or (2) have an agency… Read More
In Nagan v. Optio Sols. Llc, No. 19-C-170, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 173286, at *7 (E.D. Wis. Oct. 4, 2019), the District Court held that an FDCPA class could be certified despite the fact that the classmember would receive almost nothing. Optio asserts that a class action is not the superior method of litigating the issues here because any amount… Read More
In Koehn v. Delta Outsource Group, Inc., No. 19-1088 (7th Cir. September 29, 2019), here, the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit had had enough with ingenious interpretations of dunning letters to create a purported violation of the FDCPA. An unsophisticated consumer is “uninformed, naïve, or trusting,” Veach v. Sheeks, 316 F.3d 690, 693 (7th Cir. 2003), but nonetheless… Read More
In Carter v. Richland Holdings, No. 2:16-cv-02967-RFB-VCF, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 168010, at *12-15 (D. Nev. Sep. 30, 2019), the District Court granted summary judgment against an FDCPA Plaintiff. AcctCorp argues that it was not reporting the debt in connection to an attempt to collect the debt pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1692e, but to comply with the Fair Credit… Read More
In Bitzko v. Weltman, No. 1:17-CV-00458 (BKS/DJS), 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 161495 (N.D.N.Y. Sep. 23, 2019), the District Court held that having to inquire about the consumer nature of a debt from putative class members in an FDCPA class action did not defeat class certification. Defendant asserts that using its records to identify potential class members, and then asking those… Read More
In Kayyal v. Enhanced Recovery Co., No. 17 CV 2718, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 161475 (N.D. Ill. Sep. 23, 2019), the District Court denied summary judgment to a debt collector who as alleged to have harassed a wrong-number customer. Distilled to its essence, the parties disagree about whether ERC called Kayyal after being told it had the wrong number and… Read More
In Gonzalez v. Sallie Mae Bank, No. 18cv2457, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157007, at *3-5 (S.D. Cal. Sep. 12, 2019), Judge Burns held that a debt collector must meet the definition of a debt collector under the FDCPA, not just "hold out" inferences that it might be one. SMB points out that it is a lender, not a debt collector… Read More
They used to write the Official Staff Commentary, and give "Informal Staff Opinion" letters to industry to assist industry in complying with the FDCPA. Now, the FTC has filed a Comment in response to the CFPB's Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that can be found at https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/advocacy_documents/comment-staff-federal-trade-commissions-bureau-consumer-protection-matter-proposed-rule-request/final_-_cfpb_debt_coll_draft_comment_9-13_v2_1pm_ver_to_comm.pdf The FTC devotes almost half of their comment to reminding the CFPB that the… Read More
