UDAAP Council Weekly UDAAP Standards Report - 10/23/2014

UDAAPCouncil

Every week, courts around the United States issue decisions addressing aspects of civil UDAAP claims.

In an effort to illuminate the UDAAP standards, below is a sampling of some of this week’s UDAAP decisions on the meaning of unfair, deceptive, and abusive.

Deceptive

Plaintiff alleged a loan servicer made false reports to three credit reporting agencies and used debt collection methods prohibited by the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). The court found the plaintiff stated a claim under 1692g(b) of the FDCPA where she alleged she provided the servicer
with a notice of dispute, but the servicer continued to attempt to collect the debt despite not having proved the existence of the debt as required by the FDCPA.  Continue reading this entry

Telephone Consumer Protection Act Express Consent Narrowed Again

Albert Nigro just wanted to turn off his deceased mother-in-law’s electricity. He called the electric company, but it required that he provide his mobile telephone number to disconnect service. It turned out though that the mother-in-law had an outstanding bill of $68. Nigro did not know about that when he gave his number. He was not legally required to pay it.

The electric company hired a debt collector to recover the $68 owing on the mother-in-law’s account. The debt collector placed 72 autodial calls over the course of nine months to Nigro. In each call, the message asked for the mother-in-law. Eventually, Nigro had enough. He sued under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. He argued that while he had voluntarily given his number in connection with disconnecting his mother-in-law’s service, he had not given consent for calls about an outstanding debt. The debt collector argued, based on prior Federal Communications Commission rulings, that providing a phone number to a business permitted the business to call it. Continue reading this entry

Client Alert: Ademi & O’Reilly Enter the TCPA Fray

Serial class action filers Ademi & O’Reilly have filed four Telephone Consumer Protection Act cases in Wisconsin in the past week. Is Wisconsin about to become the next hotbed of TCPA litigation? Maybe. For more than two years, Ademi & O’Reilly have filed class action lawsuits concerning the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act nearly every day. If this is the start of a trend, pay attention as we may see over 100 Wisconsin TCPA cases in the next year. As always make sure your TCPA compliance procedures are up-to-date. Contact any of our TCPA lawyers should you have questions.