Earlier today we reported that the CFPB has taken the long-awaited next step in debt collection rulemaking activity by releasing an Outline of Proposed Rules in advance of the required Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) consultation process. The formal SBREFA hearing is scheduled for the week of August 22. The Outline of the CFPB’s […]
Last Friday, Tom Wheeler, Chairman of The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) published a blog entitled “Cutting off Robocalls.” The portion of the piece that has received the most media attention was this: “In regard to the Commission’s expectations that carriers respond to consumers’ blocking requests, I have sent letters to the CEOs of major wireless and […]
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?
The Seventh Circuit’s ruling stems from three consumers that brought suit against three debt collection agencies for violating the FDCPA’s broad prohibition on false, deceptive or misleading representations threatening to take action that collectors do not intend to actually take. 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(5). In each case, the agency had previously filed suit against the consumer in state court. The consumers argued in their lawsuits, however, that the suits against them violated the FDCPA because the agencies never had the intention of proceeding to trial; rather, the consumers alleged that the suits were brought solely to obtain a default judgment or settlement. The proof, the consumers argued, was the fact that each debt collector later moved for voluntary dismissal of their lawsuits.
Just before the Memorial Day weekend I noticed a press release from Navient, the nation’s largest student loan servicing and collection company, publishing excerpts of CEO Jack Remondi’s remarks at their Annual Meeting of Shareholders. The remarks stood out for two reasons…
The Supreme Court decision in Spokeo v. Robins was expected to provide clarity to debt industry defendants facing FDCPA and related consumer lawsuits where the Plaintiffs’ allege no actual harm. Unfortunately, the case did little to specify exactly what type of “concrete” harm a consumer must allege to pursue a claim, but did provide some excellent language that can be used to refute consumer lawsuits where no actual harm is or could be alleged.
This week’s decision from the U.S. Supreme Court in Spokeo v. Robins should bolster the defense of companies subject to several federal consumer protection statutes. The ruling addresses lawsuits that claim an injury created solely by the violation of a federal statute and require the plaintiff to demonstrate not only that the statute was violated, but that the plaintiff herself suffered harm.
This article originally appeared as an Alert on ClarkHill.com, and is republished here with permission. Lightning can strike twice. With the ink barely dry on the Consent Order against the Hanna Law Firm (Hanna) in Georgia, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) yesterday took action against another debt collection law firm for the filing […]
The requirements for what debt collectors are required to provide in “snail mail” notices to consumers arises from a patchwork of Federal, State and local laws — as well as case law that often varies by jurisdiction — and many of the requirements are antiquated, dating back to the 1970s. Unfortunately, these dated and contradictory collection letter requirements continue to result in lawsuits and adverse Court decisions against debt collectors.
This post originally appeared on the blog of Klein Moynihan and is re-published here with permission. The article was co-authored by David O. Klein and Joshua Wueller. The Federal Communications Commission (the “FCC” or “Commission”) is currently seeking comment on whether it should establish a bright-line rule for telephone lines in residential homes that are used for business […]