FMA Alliance was honored to be selected to participate last Thursday on the CFPB’s historic Small Business Review Panel (SBREFA) for debt collection rulemaking in Washington D.C. I represented FMA Alliance, along with 19 other Small Entity Representatives (SERs), to provide advice, input, and recommendations regarding the outline of proposed debt collection rules. The CFPB […]
As the only law firm small entity representative (SER) to participate in a second SBREFA panel, I came to the process with a certain level of comfort, but with preconceived notions of how the process would unfold. While the process was similar, the overall feel of the panel that convened on August 25, 2016 to engage the CFPB on Debt Collector and Debt Buyer Rulemaking was very different.
Yesterday, I was honored to be among the small business representatives who testified in front of the Small Business Review Panel for the CFPB Debt Collector and Debt Buyer Rulemaking. We testified from 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM; the feedback centered around three main themes.
The debt collection proposals outlined by the CFPB for the SBREFA panel are driven in large part by the CFPB’s reliance on the data derived from its complaint portal and a consumer survey conducted by the Bureau over several months in 2014-15. The survey results are remarkable in how closely they mirror the complaint portal data.
When collectors get sued in an FDCPA action, they face a steep uphill battle. Courts apply the very pro-consumer “least sophisticated debtor” standard when evaluating a collector’s communications, and most violations of the Act are “strict liability.” However, courts have gradually been demanding more and have rejected suits based on hyper-technicalities.
In a new decision filed on Wednesday, the US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania ruled in favor of the defendant in a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) case involving the defendant sending a letter with a visible barcode on it. The case, Anenkova v. Van Ru Credit Corporation, is a positive […]
This article was originally published on the Maurice Wutscher blog and is republished here with permission. On July 10, 2014, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit issued its opinion in Crawford v. LVNV Funding, LLC. That opinion began by decrying the “deluge” of proofs of claim filed by debt buyers on debts that are unenforceable […]
This article was originally published on the Maurice Wutscher blog and is republished here with permission. Filing a proof of claim with a bankruptcy court representing a debt subject to an expired state law limitations period does not violate the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) under an opinion released yesterday from the Seventh Circuit Court […]
On August 4, 2016 the CFPB released a rule providing safe harbors from liability under the FDCPA for certain actions taken in compliance with mortgage servicing rules, but after the consumer has made a cease communication request. This will interest the ARM industry more broadly as it may signal a willingness to provide safe harbor where notification requirements are in conflict with the consumer’s interests.
Yesterday, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed a decision from a district court in a bench trial that a collection law firm had violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) by failure to specifically state in a voice message: “This communication is from a debt collector.” The case is Davis v. […]