Press "Enter" to skip to content

Section 1692g Written Dispute that also Contains a Cease and Desist Does Not Prohibit a Debt Collector From Sending Verification

Sending verification in response to a consumer’s written demand for verification under 15 U.S.C. § 1692g, which also contains a cease and desist demand, does not violate § 1692c under a holding from the Western District of New York in Marino v. HoganWillig, PLLC11-cv-453 (W.D. NY April 24, 2012).

The Court refused to read § 1692c(c) to prohibit sending a consumer § 1692g(b) validation because it would place a debt collector

“into a frozen state where it could not seek to collect the debt because compliance with Section 1692g(b) would violate Section 1692c(c).”

The court cited the unpublished opinion in Recker v. Cent. Collection Bureau, Inc., No. 1:04-CV-2037-WTL-DFH, 2005 WL 2654222, at *4 (S.D. Ind. Oct. 17, 2005), which reasoned that “verification activities could be communications allowed implicitly under exception 1692c(c)(3).”

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.