Press "Enter" to skip to content

Posts tagged as “FCCPA”

11th Cir. Holds TCPA Consent Cannot Be Unilaterally Revoked, But Allows Unrelated FCCPA Claim to Proceed

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently reversed entry of summary judgment in favor of a satellite television provider against a consumer on claims that it violated the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act by attempting to collect a debt it knew had been discharged in bankruptcy and directly contacting the plaintiff consumer knowing she was represented by counsel.

Fla. App. Court (2nd DCA) Holds FCCPA Claims for Workplace Injury Bills Not Negated by Workers Comp Law

The District Court of Appeal for the State of Florida, Second District, recently reversed the dismissal of a plaintiff’s Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act claims relating to bills for medical care incurred as a result of a workplace injury. The trial court dismissed the FCCPA claims on the grounds that Florida’s Workers’ Compensation Law (WCL) granted exclusive jurisdiction over any matter concerning reimbursement to the state’s Department of Financial Services. However, the Appellate Court held that section 440.13(11)(c) of the WCL did not preclude trial court jurisdiction over claims against the plaintiff’s medical providers under the FCCPA for claims that…

11th Cir. Adopts ‘Claim Splitting’ Doctrine, Upholds Dismissal of Duplicative Litigation

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently affirmed the dismissal of a complaint alleging violations of the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act, the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) and its analogue under Florida state law, because the plaintiff previously filed a separate lawsuit against the same defendant alleging violations of the TCPA based on the same conduct. Because the Eleventh Circuit concluded that the claims asserted in the second action were based on the same nucleus of operative facts, the plaintiff was barred from splitting her claims among the lawsuits. A copy of the opinion…

Fla. Court (19th Jud Cir) Holds Periodic Statements Sent to Borrower Following Dismissal of Foreclosure Not Actionable Under FCCPA

The County Court of the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit in and for St. Lucie County, Florida recently dismissed a borrower’s amended complaint against a mortgage servicer alleging violations of the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act (FCCPA) for sending mortgage statements to the borrower following involuntary dismissal, without prejudice, of a foreclosure action. In dismissing the action with prejudice, the Court held that the statements sent by the defendant mortgage servicer were not attempts to collect a debt, and therefore not actionable under the FCCPA. In addition, the Court held that the plaintiff borrower failed to state a cause of action because…

11th Cir. Holds Post-Discharge Monthly Mortgage Statements Not Prohibited

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently affirmed the dismissal of a mortgage loan borrower’s federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and related state law claims because the defendant mortgagee was not a “debt collector” as defined by the FDCPA. In so ruling, the Court also rejected the borrower’s allegations that the monthly statements the mortgagee sent to the borrower after her bankruptcy discharge were impermissible implied assertions of a right to collect against her personally. A copy of the opinion in Helman v. Bank of America is available at: Link to Opinion. The borrower obtained a…

Fla. App. Court (4th DCA) Holds Victory Must Be Complete to Obtain Attorney’s Fees Under FDUTPA

The District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District, recently held that in order to recover fees for prevailing on a Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act claim, a party must prevail not only on the FDUTPA claim but also on all pleaded legal theories such that it obtains a judgment in its favor on the entire case. A copy of the opinion in Banner v. Law Office of David J. Stern, P.A. is available at:  Link to Opinion. A borrower filed a lawsuit against a lender’s counsel, alleging that the lender’s counsel’s conduct violated FDUTPA and the Florida Consumer Collection…

11th Cir. Upholds Dismissal of FDCPA, FCCPA Complaint for Failure to State Claims

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently upheld the district court’s dismissal of a borrower’s amended complaint against a loan servicer alleging claims under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA)  and the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act (FCCPA) for leaving a letter in the borrower’s mailbox, posting a letter to his front door, and sending a letter via registered mail offering the borrower various sums of financial assistance if he vacated the property. The Court held that the servicer’s actions did not constitute a demand for payment under the FDCPA and FCCPA and upheld the district…

Bankruptcy Court Holds TCPA Revocation of Consent Must Be ‘Express and Clear’

The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Florida recently held that: 1)  A bankruptcy trustee was entitled to recover $1,000 in statutory damages on behalf of each of the husband and wife debtors against a loan servicer for violating the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act (FCCPA) by contacting the debtors after they were represented by counsel; and 2)  The servicer could not set off the $2,000 in FCCPA damages against the balance owed on the mortgage loan because, according to the Court, allowing a set off would thwart the FCCPA’s goal of deterring abusive debt collection practices; and…

Florida Court Holds No Private Right of Action for Florida ‘Anti-Check Cashing Fee’ Statute

The Court of Appeal of the State of Florida, Fifth District, recently affirmed the dismissal of a check payee’s claims against the drawee bank for charging a fee to cash the check in person, holding that while section 655.85, Florida Statutes, prohibits the bank from charging such a fee, it does not create a private cause of action. However, the Court also held that federal law did not preempt the state “anti-check cashing fee” statute, even as applied to an out-of-state insured state bank. A copy of the opinion is available at: Link to Opinion. The payee of a check…

Florida Court Holds V-Mail Message Asking Return Call Can Be Debt Collection Communication

The U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida recently denied a motion to dismiss an amended complaint alleging that a time-share association violated the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act (FCCPA) and the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), holding that: A debtor need not use any precise language or magic word to notify a debt collector that the debtor is represented by legal counsel with respect to a debt; A voicemail message merely asking the debtor to return the call to discuss the debt was a debt collection communication; and Declaratory relief may be available under the TCPA.…

SD Fla. Provides Mixed Ruling on RESPA RFI Responses, Property Inspection Fees Assessed Post-Default

The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida recently dismissed with prejudice a borrowers’ allegations that a loan servicer’s response to their request for information regarding drive-by property inspections violated the federal Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA), and dismissed the remaining state-law allegations that the drive-by inspections violated the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act (FCCPA) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. A copy of the opinion is available here: Link to Opinion. The borrowers defaulted on their home mortgage loan.  The loan servicer began conducting drive-by inspections pursuant to the mortgage. The borrowers sent a letter to the…

Florida Court Denies Motion to Dismiss FCCPA Claim Against Loan Owner Based on Alleged Conduct of Servicer, Foreclosure Counsel

The Seventh Judicial Circuit Court of Florida recently denied a motion to dismiss a borrower’s counterclaims alleging violations of the Florida Consumer Collections Practices Act (FCCPA) against the owner of a mortgage loan, based on alleged communications by the servicer and foreclosure counsel with a debtor supposedly known to be represented by counsel and attempting to collect an allegedly invalid debt. In so ruling, the Court also held: Merely foreclosing on a mortgage, without more, did not constitute “debt collection” under the FDCPA; False statements regarding a debt made to a court instead of directly to the debtor are not…