Press "Enter" to skip to content

Massachusetts Collection Law Firms Are Now ‘Debt Collectors’

2000px-Seal_of_Massachusetts_svgIn an Opinion Letter letter dated Nov. 2, the Massachusetts Division of Banks declared that collection law firms in Massachusetts are required to obtain a debt collector license pursuant to Mass. Gen. Laws Ch. 92, § 24 et. seq.

The Opinion Letter was in response to correspondence from a Massachusetts collection law firm inquiring whether the firm, self-described as “overwhelmingly concentrated in the area of consumer debt collection on behalf of its clients,” was required to be licensed.  At issue was the applicability of the licensing exclusion for “attorneys-at-law collecting a debt on behalf of a client.”  In its Opinion, the Division clarified that the determination “turns on the extent of the debt collection activity conducted by the firm.”

The Division reasoned that the Massachusetts definition of “debt collector” includes any person “who regularly collects or attempts to collect, directly or indirectly, a debt owed or due or asserted to be owed or due another.”  Drawing upon the definition of “regular” from Black’s Law Dictionary, the Division explained that the limited “ ‘attorney-at-law’ exclusion applies to ‘attorneys collecting a debt on behalf of a client’ rather than attorneys who regularly collect debts on behalf of a client.” (emphasis in original)

Thus, based on the law firm’s description of the nature of its practice, the Division concluded that the law firm’s “principal purpose is the collection of debts and therefore its activities are beyond the scope of the attorney-at-law exemption.”

In a footnote, the Division gives Massachusetts collection law firms six months to comply, noting “the debt collector licensing requirement for law firms composed of Massachusetts licensed attorneys, as set forth in this Opinion, is a new requirement that will not be imposed retroactively on affected law firms. Furthermore, the Division recognizes that immediate compliance by affected law firms is not feasible.”

Many state debt collection statutes exempt attorneys from the licensing requirements, so it will be important to stay abreast of this issue in the event other policymakers consider adopting a similar position.

Eric Rosenkoetter is a principal at Maurice Wutscher LLP, and is focused on advising clients with respect to federal and state consumer financial protection laws and data privacy and security, and he is a Certified Information Privacy Professional though the International Association of Privacy Professionals. He also brings to the table experience as a litigator, chief compliance and ethics officer, director of legislative affairs, federal lobbyist, and administrative hearings officer. Eric earned his Juris Doctor from Washington University School of Law, and his Bachelor of Business Administration from Southern Methodist University. He is a member of the International Association of Privacy Professionals, the Receivables Management Association International (RMAI), and ACA International. He is admitted to practice law in Texas and Missouri and in the U.S. District Courts for the Northern, Southern, Eastern, and Western Districts of Texas. For more information, see https://mauricewutscher.com/attorneys/eric-rosenkoetter/

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.