Press "Enter" to skip to content

Posts published in “FDCPA”

Fair Debt Collection Practices Act

CFPB Considers New Rules, Seeks Public Comment

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau announced today it is seeking comment from the public about debt collection practices as the bureau considers new rules designed to protect consumers “without imposing unnecessary burdens” on the industry, according to the CFPB. The CFPB is gathering information from all sources — consumers, advocates and industry representatives — on a range…

Breaking Down the Second Circuit’s Recent Decision Re Disclosure Disputes Under FDCPA’s 1692g(a)(3): What Debt Collectors Need to Know

The Second Circuit’s recent decision in Hooks v. Forman has received quite a bit of attention since it was handed down May 29.  The case held that a disclosure made pursuant to 1692g(a) violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act when it instructed the recipient of the…

FDCPA Decision of the Day: Attorney’s Letterhead, Alone, Not a Threat to Sue

In today’s FDCPA Decision of the Day, a United States District Court for the District of New Jersey held that an attorney’s letterhead, standing alone, is not an implied threat of litigation. The Plaintiff, a New Jersey resident, claimed that the defendant, a Georgia law firm, violated section 1692e(5)…

CFPB Releases Annual FDCPA Report to Congress

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau today released its Annual Report to Congress on the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”). The Report outlines the consumer complaints received by the Bureau and the Federal Trade Commission relating to FDCPA practices, the Bureau’s efforts in supervising persons…

SCOTUS – Unsuccessful Plaintiffs in FDCPA Cases Can Be Liable for Costs Without Showing Bad Faith

In a seven to two opinion released this morning, the Supreme Court held that a plaintiff, who is unsuccessful in a claim under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) 15 U.S.C. 1692, et seq., can be liable for the defendant’s costs even if the lawsuit was not…