Last week, in Haddad v. Alexander, Zelmanski, Danner & Fioritto, PLLC, the Sixth Circuit expanded the requirement for how a debt collector must respond to a debtor’s request for verification of a debt under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, creating the most consumer-friendly verification standard ever.
The U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York issued a temporary restraining order and asset freeze against a Buffalo, NY-based debt collection operation Monday, after the Federal Trade Commission and New York Attorney General’s Office filed a joint complaint alleging the operation used lies and threats against consumers in violation of federal and state laws.
Larger participants in the debt industry need to prepare for CFPB supervision, and an essential part of that preparation will be to establish a formal compliance management system.
On July 14, 2014, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”), a Federal regulatory body created by the Dodd Frank Act of 2010 mounted a frontal attack on this bedrock of separation of powers principle by filing suit in the United States District Court against a prominent consumer collection law firm, Frederick J. Hanna and Associates, P.C. of Atlanta Georgia.
Numerous recent FDCPA lawsuits challenge the ability of debt collectors to assess interest to accounts. These cases focus on a number of factors including whether collection letters need to disclose the accrual of interest and also interest on purchased accounts.
May 2014 was a light month overall for debt collection complaints, and most types of litigation, according to new data from WebRecon. While 3188 consumers filed CFPB complaints against debt collectors – that’s a little more than 100 consumers a day – it still represents a 15.8 percent decline from April 2014. In all, the CFPB […]
The CFPB announced Monday it has filed a lawsuit against a debt collection law firm and its three principal partners alleging that the firm was a “lawsuit mill” that churned out debt collection actions and violated the FDCPA en masse. The firm denies the claims and says it will defend the action in court.
Addressing what it termed “a deluge [that] has swept through U.S. bankruptcy courts of late,” the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Crawford v. LVNV Funding, LLC last week held that filing a proof of claim on time barred debt is conduct that violates the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA).
The full Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals last week struck down rulings from lower courts, a previous three-judge circuit panel, and even a decision it reached itself in 1996 to reinterpret venue provisions of the FDCPA as they relate to townships vs. counties in Indiana.
A U.S. District Judge last week ruled that a debt collection law firm violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) by not conducting a “meaningful review” of a collection action filed against a consumer. The judge used reasoning from the landmark case Lesher, decided three years ago.