In a split decision, the First Circuit Court of Appeals last week upheld a lower court ruling that a collection letter send by a law firm violated the FDCPA because it gave the impression that the consumer could not dispute the debt and that payment was the only option to avoid litigation.
A collection agency that late last month lost an appeal in the Third Circuit has filed a petition for a rehearing, according to ACA International. The case involved an account number being visible through the clear window of an envelope.
If you think developing a compliance management system is too costly — try getting sued. A growing trend in CFPB compliance for small- and medium-sized collection agencies and debt buyers is to retain a third party with the experience, skills and infrastructure to help them develop, support and drive their in house compliance management system. […]
The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals recently upheld a lower court ruling that found a debt collection agency in violation of the FDCPA for continuing to call a debtor after the bill had been paid to the original creditor. The agency argued that it never received a dispute in writing after the debt was paid.
The Third Circuit Court of Appeals Thursday said that a collection agency violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) when it sent a collection letter with the debtor’s account number visible through the transparent address window of an envelope.
In comments submitted to the CFPB on the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking under the FDCPA, the attorneys general of 31 states condemned the use of third-party prepared, integrated business records in civil lawsuits to collect debt as an example of “unfair, deceptive, and abusive acts or practices.” But many of those AGs use similar records in their own criminal cases.
Brandon Scroggin had an air-tight FDCPA claim against a debt collection agency. It was such a solid case, the company offered him a $5,000 settlement to make it go away. But now Scroggin owes the agency more than $33,000 to pay their attorney’s fees. So how did he go from five grand up to 33-large in the hole?
Lawsuits against ARM firms citing violations of the FDCPA increased slightly in July, but were still on pace to finish far below the number filed in 2013. TCPA lawsuits also bucked their 2014 trend by decreasing on a month-over-month basis, but still remain on pace to grow significantly for the year.
The Federal Trade Commission has joined the CFPB in filing an amicus brief in the matter of Hernandez v. Williams, Zinman & Parham, P.C before the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The case concerns the interpretation and enforcement of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA).
A recent Circuit Court opinion examined the issue of what constitutes adequate verification in the context of multiple requests for validation by the consumer focused on a specific portion of a debt. While it has been argued that the case requires a debt collector to provide itemized statements whenever any request for validation is received, this interpretation is not borne out by a careful reading of the case and other applicable precedent.