A bill introduced in the U.S. Senate this month by a coalition of Senators known for their consumer protection positions would amend the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) to place new requirements on both credit reporting agencies and companies that furnish information to those agencies.
The past year has seen regulators place their focus firmly on the debt collection industry, specifically on the latter stages of the collection process involving third party suppliers such as collection agencies and debt buyers.
The Consumer Financial Protection Agency Tuesday released a report on the private student loan market in the U.S. that emphasized the need for reform in the way lenders treat certain co-signer agreement clauses, going so far as to urge borrowers to seek co-signer releases.
A federal judge in New Jersey last week approved the settlement of a class action lawsuit against a collection agency over the validation language the firm used in a letter to a consumer. The settlement calls for the debt collection firm to pay $9,500 to the lead plaintiff and potential class of 225 consumers, with the plaintiffs’ attorneys receiving $40,000.
In an era when most people cannot live without their mobile devices, the accounts receivable landscape is undergoing a massive transformation due to the CFPB, the rise in smartphone use and evolving consumer communication preferences.
Cohen & Slamowitz, LLP, a law firm specializing in retail credit collections in New York State, is pleased to announce the promotion of Denise Pavlides, Esq. to the position of Managing Compliance Attorney.
There’s an irritating dinner-party-conversation-starter topic about how, because of physics and aerodynamics, bumblebees shouldn’t be able to fly. It’s a ridiculous argument because: (a) bumblebees have been flying just fine since there were bees to bumble; and (b) it’s not like if you told a bumblebee, “Hey, you, with the bumbles: did you know you […]
The underlying putative class action complaint was filed in state court and removed by the defendants who then filed a motion to dismiss. The District Court granted the unopposed motion to dismiss and the subsequent motion for reconsideration filed by the plaintiff. The motions were granted due to the fact that, “Counts I through V are clearly barred by the FDCPA’s one-year statute of limitations and Count VI is insufficient to sustain a common law negligence claim and is additionally precluded by Missouri’s economic loss doctrine.” Id. at *2.
DBA International’s Introductory Survey Course on Debt Buying is now available online. Individuals seeking their Certified Receivables Compliance Professional (CRCP) designation or wanting to gain additional professional education can view the recording from the 2014 DBA Annual Conference via DBA’s website 24/7. The Introductory Survey Course is required for individuals seeking their CRCP designation through […]
A Pennsylvania federal judge Tuesday denied debt collector North Shore Agency Inc.’s motion to dismiss a putative class action lawsuit. The case alleges that North Shore Agency Inc. obscured language advising consumers of their rights to challenge their debts. In his opinion, U.S. District Judge Gene Pratter noted potential holes in the Fair Debt Collection […]