Press "Enter" to skip to content

Posts tagged as “FDCPA”

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…

Arizona Fed. Court Holds No FDCPA Violation for Collecting on Ex-Spouse’s Discharged Debt

The U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona recently held that a debt collector did not violate the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) by attempting to collect on a debt because a debtor’s spouse’s bankruptcy proceedings did not discharge the debt to the extent that the debtor himself may be liable for it. A copy of the opinion in Parker v. First Step Group of Minnesota LLC is available at:  Link to Opinion. The debt at issue arose prior to June 2010, and both the debtor and his wife were liable on the debt.  In June 2010, the…

EDNY Holds Providing Callback Information to Third Party Violated FDCPA

The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York recently granted summary judgment in favor of a debtor in his claim that a debt collector violated the FDCPA when the debt collector, in attempting to reach the debtor by telephone, left a message with a third party providing the debt collector’s callback information. The Court held that because the undisclosed nature of the call may induce the debtor to contact a debt collector when he does not wish to do so, the debt collector must refrain from leaving callback information and attempt the call at a later time…

7th Cir. Rejects FDCPA Allegations Involving Letters Sent to Debtor’s Counsel

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently upheld the dismissal of allegations that two letters sent to the consumer’s counsel violated the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), reiterating that its “competent attorney” standard applies regardless of whether a statement to the consumer’s counsel is false, misleading or deceptive. A copy of the opinion in Bravo v. Midland Credit Management, Inc. is available at: Link to Opinion. In a prior action, the debtor sued a debt collector for alleged violations of the FDCPA.  The case settled with the collector settling and releasing two of the debtor’s debts.  After settlement,…

Oregon Fed. Court Holds Voicemail Messages on Debtor’s Cell Phone Did Not Violate FDCPA

The U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon recently granted summary judgment in favor of a debt collector, ruling that the collector’s voice mail messages for the debtor did not unlawfully communicate with a third party under the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) and related state law, because the collector could not “reasonably foresee” that debtor’s boyfriend and manager would overhear the voicemail messages left on her cell phone. A copy of the opinion in Peak v. Professional Credit Service is available at:  Link to Opinion. A debtor’s unpaid account was referred to a debt collector. The debtor negotiated a…

Illinois Bankruptcy Court Rejects Crawford, Finds Time-Barred Claims Permissible ­

A recent decision from a United States Bankruptcy Court in the Northern District of Illinois provides a detailed analysis of why proofs of claim on “time-barred” debt do not violate the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) or the Bankruptcy Code. The decision, Glenn v. Cavalry Investments, LLC, is among the growing number of decisions rejecting Crawford v. LVNV from the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. A copy of the opinion is available at: Link to Opinion. The debtor, Darryl Glenn, voluntarily commenced a chapter 13 bankruptcy in August 2014.  The creditor, Cavalry Investments, filed a timely proof of…

2nd Cir. Holds Debtor Can Bring Post-Discharge FDCPA Claims in District Court

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently held that a debtor in bankruptcy can pursue claims under the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act in district court for trying to collect a discharged debt, reversing a judgment dismissing the FDCPA claims and requiring the plaintiff seek relief in bankruptcy court. A copy of the opinion in Garfield v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC is available at:  Link to Opinion. The debtor defaulted on her mortgage loan and filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy, agreeing in her reorganization plan to pay the arrearage on her mortgage in monthly payments.  The debtor received…

7th Cir. Reverses Denial of Class Cert. in FDCPA ‘Time-Barred Debt’ Case

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently reversed a district court’s denial of class certification in a putative class action alleging that a debt collector violated the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) by sending supposedly misleading letters to Illinois residents trying to collect time-barred debts. A copy of the opinion in Scott McMahon v. LVNV Funding, LLC is available at:  Link to Opinion. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant debt collector violated the FDCPA because it sent “dunning letters containing language that would mislead an unsophisticated consumer into believing that the debt is legally enforceable” even…

Florida Court Reverses Dismissal of FDCPA Allegations in Foreclosure Action

The Appellate Division of the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit of the State of Florida recently reversed dismissal of a federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) claim alleging a debt collector’s letter falsely represented a bank was the creditor of a loan. In so ruling, the Appellate Division confirmed that even though a foreclosure action is not necessarily debt collection, the enforcement of a promissory note constitutes debt collection activity even if done in conjunction with the enforcement of a security interest, and even the debt collector stated it was seeking solely to foreclose the creditor’s lien on the real estate,…

Georgia Court Rejects FDCPA Challenge to Alleged Affidavit Misrepresentations as Immaterial

The Court of Appeals of Georgia, Second Division, recently held that a debt collector did not violate the federal Fair Debt Collections Practices Act (FDCPA), holding that even if the alleged misrepresentations in the debt collector’s affidavit were technically false, they were not material and thus failed to state a claim. A copy of the opinion in Summer v. Security Credit Services LLC is available at:  Link to Opinion. In August 2006, a national bank issued a credit card to the debtors, who defaulted by failing to pay the account.  In April 2011, the issuing bank and a debt buying company…

2nd Cir. Holds FDCPA Action Accrues When Injury Occurs, Not Necessarily When Violation Occurs

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently reversed dismissal of a federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) claim based on the statute of limitations, holding that an FDCPA violation occurs when a bank freezes a debtor’s bank account, not when a debt collector sends a restraining notice to the bank. In so ruling, the Court distinguished the rulings in Maloy v. Phillips, 64 F. 3d 607 (11th Cir. 1995) and Mattson v. U.S. W. Commc’ns, Inc., 967 F. 2d 259 (8th Cir. 1992), which held that an FDCPA violation occurs when the alleged unlawful debt collection…

Oregon Fed. Court Holds Request to ‘Please’ Provide Debt Dispute in Writing Violates FDCPA

The U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon recently held that a notice provided pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1692g that also contained additional language requesting that a dispute of the debt “please” be sent in writing violated the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). In so ruling, the District Court held that such additional language overshadows or is inconsistent with a consumer’s right to orally dispute the debt within the 30-day period under 15 U.S.C. 1692g, and constitutes a false representation or deceptive means to collect or attempt to collect a debt under the FDCPA. A copy of…