Encore Capital Group, Inc. subsidiary Midland Credit Management Inc. (Midland), and several related companies have agreed to a settlement in multi-district TCPA litigation accusing the Defendants of violating the TCPA when trying to reach debtors. This is the fourth large TCPA settlement in July alone.
What do you get when you bring together twenty Creditor Grantors with fifteen ARM Agencies and have over 160 intimate, yet formal appointments? You get one of the most productive events in the history of the industry: insideARM’s Inaugural One-to-One Appointments Forum.
In an opinion issued yesterday, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a district court’s summary judgment in favor of the defendant in an action under the FDCPA. The panel held that the validation notice is required of both the initial debt collector, as well as subsequent collectors that communicate about the same debt.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently reversed in part a trial court’s ruling granting summary judgment in favor of a debt buyer, its affiliated debt collector and their parent company, holding that a reasonable jury could find that the defendants willfully violated the FCRA when they reported two charged-off debt accounts as “verified” without obtaining sufficient documentation that the debts in fact belonged to the plaintiff.
In a non-industry-related TCPA class-action suit, a district court found in favor of the defendants, specifically citing Spokeo and the plaintiff’s inability to produce evidence of actual damages. Spokeo is proving to be the next-best-thing to actual TCPA reform, and seeing its use in cases outside the debt industry is promising.
Debt collection letters continue to provide an expansive target for FDCPA and related lawsuits due to the panoply of Federal and State disclosure requirements for such letters. Further, the Court cases interpreting these requirements are in constant flux and new decisions sometimes contradict previous rulings. In a rare win for the collection industry, a recent case out of the Eastern District of New York rejected a consumer’s FDCPA claims brought in a putative class action and premised on language included in a collection letter. What does this bode for the industry?
On July 12, 2016 the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reviewed two U.S. Department of Education (ED) debt collector protests over their contracts not being extended in March of 2015.
Yesterday, a New York federal jury on Tuesday convicted the owner of a defunct debt collection firm over his alleged role in a $4.1 million fraud scheme involving fake arrest warrant threats against consumers. He faces up to 20 years in prison.
All debt collectors and others who call Minnesota telephone lines using a prerecorded or synthesized voice message with an auto dialer should know about the Minnesota Automatic Dialing-Announcing Devices statute, Minn. Stat. § 325E.26, et seq. (“ADAD Act”). In short, the Minnesota statute provides that if you call a Minnesota telephone line – residential or […]
On July 6, 2016 a federal judge in Illinois gave initial approval to a $9.25 million settlement between American Express Co., American Express Centurion Bank (together AmEx), and consumers who said the company made illegal debt collection calls and telemarketing calls to their cell phones. This case is the third significant TCPA class action settlement insideARM has reported on in the last 10 days.