In Donohue v. Quick Collect, Inc., Case No. 09-35183 (9th Cir. Jan. 13, 2010), the Ninth Circuit interpreted two sections of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) and held that a collections agency did not violate the FDCPA because the original payment terms between the appellant and her dental practice did not constitute a forbearance agreement under Washington State law. Additionally, the court held that the collections agency did not violate the FDCPA when it mislabeled the interest owed on the debt. The court found that the overall amount owed by the appellant was correct and, therefore, the mislabeled interest was not “materially false.”
Tag Archives: Donohue v. Quick Collect
Subscribe to this Blog
Topics
- Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection
- Class Actions
- Compliance
- Consumer Financial Protection Act
- Consumer Financial Protection Agency
- Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
- Credit CARD Act
- Electronic Funds Transfer Act
- Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act
- Fair Credit Reporting Act
- Fair Debt Collection Practices Act
- Fair Housing Act
- Lending Discrimination
- Mortgage Foreclosures
- Preemption
- Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act
- State Consumer Protection Laws
- Truth in Lending Act
Recent Updates
- CFSL Action Update: March 15, 2012 – April 16, 2012
- CFPB Says Rescission Complete on Notice
- Court Permits Creditor to Charge and Collect Convenience or Expedited Payment Fees
- The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Proposes Boundaries for its Nonbank Supervision of Debt Collection and Credit Reporting Organizations
- Second Circuit Panel Strikes Arbitration Agreement With Class Action Waiver