The 10th circuit finds enough immaterial damage …

0

Each week, ACA International’s compliance team covers case summaries relevant to ACA members. Members can also submit cases for review to our compliance team at [email protected].

Here are the cases covered from August 24 to 27:

24 august

Borden v. eFinancial: Consumer did not plausibly allege ATDS was used to send text messages

A consumer claimed that eFinancial sent their insurance SMS ads using an ATDS.

Continue reading the summary here.

Boardman v. Green Dot: the cell phone can presumably be considered a residential line under the TCPA

The North Carolina District Court finds that a cell phone can likely qualify as residential for the purposes of the Consumer Telephone Protection Act.

Continue reading the summary here.

Thomas v. Unifin: Court Applies Hunstein, Retains FDCPA Claims in Federal Court

In a related decision such as Keller v. Northstar, U.S. District Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman of the Northern District of Illinois found that a consumer claimed to have suffered harm by claiming that a collector using a third-party letter provider violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. in Sections 1692c (b) and 1692f when he disclosed information about his debt to the seller, and the court dismissed the consumer’s request for pre-trial detention.

Continue reading the summary here.

Keller v. Northstar: Court Applies Hunstein, Retains FDCPA Claims in Federal Court

In a related decision like Thomas v. Unifin, U.S. District Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman of the Northern District of Illinois once again found that consumers were alleging factual harm by claiming that a collector using a third-party letter carrier violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. in sections 1692c (b) and 1692f when he disclosed information about their debts to the seller, and the court dismissed the consumers’ request for pre-trial detention.

Continue reading the summary here.

25 august

Garrett v. Finan. Bus. & The inconvenients. Sol .: Collector wins summary judgment on all FDCPA charges

A Colorado court rejected a consumer’s claim that the collector’s statement “CALLING FOR MORE INFORMATION OR TO MAKE A PAYMENT IS NOT A SUBSTITUTE FOR DISPUTING DEBT” was false or misleading, or that it overshadowed the disclosures required under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. The court granted summary judgment for the collector on all of the claims.

Continue reading the summary here.

Stephenson v. Midland: Letters mentioning litigation did not violate FDCPA

In this case, the consumer received letters from a debt collector stating that if she did not contact the debt collector or attempt to resolve her debt, she would be referred to a lawyer for review and possibly prosecution. The consumer claimed the letters threatened legal action that the debt collector did not intend to take.

Continue reading the summary here.

Twardowski v. Credit management: confusion and consultation with a lawyer that is not sufficient to act accordingly

The court ruled that the stress of a consumer, without a physical manifestation and without a qualified medical diagnosis, combined with the confusion and consulting a lawyer after obtaining a collection letter were not sufficient to establish standing.

Continue reading the summary here.

26 august

Albright v. Clayton and Myrick: Inactive threats to sue consumer bring debt collector to court

The consumer received two collection letters from a law firm which stated in part that if she did not pay off her debt, the law firm would contact a local lawyer to prosecute her. The law firm has never sued on these types of accounts. The consumer has requested summary judgment.

Continue reading the summary here.

Vazzano v. Admissible Mgmt Services: defendant FDCPA obtains judgment on all claims

A Texas court dismissed a consumer’s claim that her challenge to a debt along with her request that further communications be written constituted a request to cease communications and, because the collector only sent ‘One letter, the court ruled on the pleadings for the collector with respect to all claims.

Continue reading the summary here.

Lupia v. Medicredit: 10th circuit finds intangible damage sufficient to stand up

The 10th Circuit upheld the granting of the summary judgment by the district court, ruling that the consumer’s claim that the debt collector had interfered with his isolation constituted concrete damage.

Continue reading the summary here.

August 27

Altman v. Zwicker & Associates: Letter offering credit card application if balance paid in full is not misleading under FDCPA

In this case, the consumer received a letter stating that if he paid off all of his credit card debt, he would be eligible to receive a credit card application. The letter listed the conditions for refusing the request. The consumer sued the debt collector, claiming the letter was false and misleading under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

Continue reading the summary here.

Magdy v. ICSystem, Inc: third party cannot pursue FDCPA claim

A lawyer receiving a letter from a collector who was not representing the debtor whose accounts were in issue cannot file a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act claim for unlawful communication with a third party because the lawyer was not not a “consumer” under the FDCPA.

Continue reading the summary here.

Boardman v. Green Dot: the cell phone can presumably be considered a residential line under the TCPA

The North Carolina District Court finds that a cell phone can likely qualify as residential for the purposes of the Consumer Telephone Protection Act.

Continue reading the summary here.

If you have recently obtained legal advice that may benefit other ACA members, email it to us: [email protected].

  • Join the discussion on legal and compliance topics with your fellow member lawyer program community members on The Hub. Just log in to The center and select Member Advocate Program from the Communities menu.
  • The ACA’s day-to-day decision is fed by ACA’s litigation defense and compliance teams.


Source link

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.