Tag Archives: Fair Debt Collection Practices Act

UDAAP Council Weekly UDAAP Standards Report - 12/10/2014

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. Unfair A mortgagee was not liable under Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) regulations … Continue reading this entry

UDAAP Council Weekly UDAAP Standards Report - 12/03/14

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.… Continue reading this entry

When Is a Debt Not a Debt? The Supreme Court May Need to Decide

A recent decision by the Seventh Circuit has held that the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) is violated when a debt collector sends a dunning letter seeking to settle a time-barred debt, even when no litigation is threatened. The Third and Eighth Circuits have disagreed. This sets up a split in the Circuits that … Continue reading this entry

Fourth Circuit Lets Consumers Orally Dispute Validity of Debts

In a per curiam decision which vacated the lower court’s dismissal of a consumer class action under the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, in a case of first impression in that circuit, found that debt collection notices violate the FDCPA if they require consumers’ disputes of the … Continue reading this entry

Seventh Circuit Affirms Rulings on Debt Collection Notices

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, in a consolidated appeal of four separate cases, recently affirmed a lower court’s dismissal of four separate cases for failure to state claims under the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). In Gruber v. Creditors’ Protection Service, Inc., Nos. 13-2084, 13-2164, 13-2297 and 13-2351, __ F.3d … Continue reading this entry

Chicago Joins CFPB in Information-Sharing Partnership; City Takes Additional Measures

In a first-of-its-kind partnership with a municipality, CFPB Director Richard Cordray and Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel jointly announced a framework for sharing of information between the City and the CFPB. Under the agreement, Chicago becomes the first city in the nation to agree to directly report alleged violations of federal consumer financial protection laws and regulations to … Continue reading this entry

Party Crashers: CFPB Files Amicus Briefs in Private Lawsuits, Seeks Referrals

Since late 2011, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has been quietly filing amicus curiae (or friend-of-the-court) briefs in some federal appellate cases brought by private litigants. The Bureau is now publicizing its amicus program–and it is actively seeking additional case referrals.  According to the Bureau, “strong candidates” include cases which have been, or imminently will … Continue reading this entry

Ninth Circuit Narrows FDCPA Restrictions on Collection Letters

In Riggs v. Prober & Raphael, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 11631 (9th Cir. Cal. June 8, 2012), the Ninth Circuit clarified the scope of its restrictions on validation notices under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) and consequently under California’s Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“Rosenthal Act”).   Both the FDCPA and the Rosenthal Act seek to … Continue reading this entry

The Ninth Circuit Permits Cumulative Recovery Under the FDCPA and California's Rosenthal Act

The recent Ninth Circuit decision, Gonzalez v. Arrow Financial Services, LLC, — F.3d —, 2011 WL 4430844 (9th Cir Sept. 23, 2011), addresses several issues relating to claims brought under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) and examines that statute’s interaction with the corresponding California debt collection statute, the Rosenthal Act.… Continue reading this entry

The FDCPA's Validation Notice Requirement: The First Communication is the Only Communication

In the recent Third Circuit decision of Peterson v. Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC, 10-2824, 2011 WL 2181508 (3d. Cir. June 6, 2011), the court reviewed the event that triggers the running of the one year statute of limitations for a violation of the FDCPA’s validation notice requirement. In the Peterson case, Robert Peterson (“Peterson”) sued Portfolio Recovery Associates, … Continue reading this entry

Misleading Representation in State Court Pleadings Does Not Violate FDCPA

According to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act and its protections do not extend to representations or statements in court pleadings. Specifically, in O’Rourke v. Palisades Acquisition XVI, LLC, the court held that a debt collector’s communications to an Illinois state court judge in an action against a debtor … Continue reading this entry

Attempting To Collect a Time Barred Debt Does Not Violate the FDCPA So Long as Litigation Is Not Threatened

Debt collectors do not violate the Fair Debt Collection Practice Act by attempting to collect a debt that the statute of limitations bars, so long as litigation is not threatened — at least so says the Third Circuit Court of Appeals. In Huetras v. Gallexy Asset Management, the plaintiff claimed that Asset Management Professionals violated the … Continue reading this entry

Fifth Circuit Affirms Dismissal FDCPA Claims

In Castro v. Collecto, Inc., No. 09-50975, 2011 WL 651921 (5th Cir. Feb. 24, 2011), the Fifth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiffs’ Fair Debt Collections Practices Act (“FDCPA”) claims, holding that the two year statute of limitations under the Federal Communications Act (“FCA”) did not preempt the four year Texas statue of limitations period for … Continue reading this entry

Seventh Circuit Rules That Debtor's Attorney Does Not Fall Within Definition of Consumer

Under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), the Seventh Circuit ruled that a debt collector may freely communicate with a debtor’s lawyer about a debt owed, regardless of the FDCPA’s prohibition against speaking directly to a debtor about the debt. Tinsley v. Integrity Financial Partners, Inc., Case No. 10-2045.… Continue reading this entry

Eleventh Circuit Interprets "Bona Fide Error" Defense to the FDCPA

In deciding a case of first impression for the Court, the Eleventh Circuit recently joined other circuits, including the Eighth and Ninth Circuits, in finding that determining if a debt collector can benefit from the “bona fide error” defense to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) is a fact-intensive inquiry that requires a case-by-case … Continue reading this entry

Eleventh Circuit Recognizes Individual Sale of Item over the Internet as Both a Commercial and a Consumer Transaction

In a recent case before the Eleventh Circuit (Oppenheim v. I.C. System, Inc.), the court upheld a jury award of $1,000 in statutory damages and $20,986.21 in attorneys fees and costs against the defendant – a debt collector hired by PayPal to collect monies owed by plaintiff pursuant to PayPal’s contract for services. Plaintiff used PayPal to process payment for the sale of his … Continue reading this entry

Is Initiating a Non-Judicial Foreclosure "Debt Collection" Under the FDCPA?

In a recent decision (Maynard v. Cannon), the Tenth Circuit acknowledged, but declined to take a position on, the debate as to whether a non-judicial foreclosure constitutes “debt collection” under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). A non-judicial foreclosure can be initiated in certain jurisdictions by filing a notice of default with the applicable county … Continue reading this entry

FDCPA Claim Cannot Be Based on Proof of Claim

Lamont and Melissa Simmons filed for bankruptcy protection in 2007. Roundup Funding filed a proof of claim saying the Simmons owed $2039.21. The Simmons responded saying we owe you money, but not that much. The judge agreed and reduced the claim to $1100.  The Simmons then sued, seeking class certification, contending Roundup violated the Fair Debt … Continue reading this entry

FDCPA Fee-Shifting Applies To Appellate Proceedings, Tenth Circuit Holds

In Anchondo v. Anderson, Crenshaw & Associates, L.L.C, — F.3d —, 2010 WL 3261155 (10th Cir. Aug. 16, 2010), the Tenth Circuit held that, like that of the Truth in Lending Act (TILA), the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act’s (FDCPA) fee-shifting provision encompasses appellate actions. Anchondo was lead plaintiff in a class action against Anderson … Continue reading this entry

11th Circuit Affirms Drastically Reduced FDCPA Attorneys' Fee Award

In a decision that will affect some attorneys’ willingness to prosecute Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) claims, the Eleventh Circuit recently affirmed a drastic reduction in attorneys’ fees in a successful FDCPA case. In Hepsen v. J.C. Christensen & Assocs., Inc., No. 10-12231, 2010 WL 3329836 (11th Cir. Aug. 25, 2010), the court affirmed a magistrate … Continue reading this entry

Seventh Circuit Says No Express Demand for Repayment Required For A Communication To Be In Connection With Collecting A Debt

In the recently-decided Gburek v. Litton Loan Servicing LP, the Seventh Circuit had occasion to add color to what communications will be deemed “in connection with the collection of any debt” under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). Gburek was in default on a mortgage loan serviced by Litton. In December 2007, she received two letters … Continue reading this entry

Fifth Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Truth in Lending Act and Fair Debt Collection Practices Act Claims Under Res Judicata Doctrine

In Hargrove v. Barclays Capital Real Estate Inc., Slip Copy, 2010 WL 2836167 (5th Cir. July 20, 2010) (per curiam), the Fifth Circuit recently affirmed a Southern District of Texas opinion in favor of a loan servicer in a lawsuit brought by pro se mortgagors who sought to quiet title on their property. In their … Continue reading this entry

Supreme Court Clarifies Bona Fide Error Defense

The United States Supreme Court has resolved a circuit split concerning the “bona fide error” defense found in the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”). While confirming the old axiom “ignorance of the law is no excuse,” the Supreme Court ruled that the FDCPA’s bona fide error defense cannot be used to assert errors of law. In … Continue reading this entry