Secrets to Defeating FDCPA Claims
ARM companies often find themselves under siege from consumers and their attorneys claiming violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). While many claims have to be handled in court, some can be squashed early in the process.
Two ARM defense experts discuss ways agencies can defeat FDCPA claims, both before and after the cases enter the legal system.
In the latest episode of their ARM legal podcast, Attorneys John Rossman and Mike Poncin discuss specific strategies for preventing and defeating FDCPA claims including collection call recordings, researching the background of FDCPA Plaintiffs, leveraging relationships with opposing counsel and fighting the good fight.
Listen to the 12 minute podcast below:
(if you can’t see the player, listen to the podcast at http://traffic.libsyn.com/thedrill/TDCD_ep20.mp3)
Editor’s Note: Don’t forget insideARM’s Ask the Attorney webinar series, kicking off on October 25. The first session will feature ARM defense attorneys. Learn more.
LOL, did I really just hear them say that if it’s a technical violation and did not really harm the consumer try to have it deemed a technical violation and not really a violation that harmed the consumer so get the case dismissed.
Good stuff and good luck with that !!
@ todd-bean. In fact, that has happened.
One of the attorneys in this podcast wrote about it (and we ran it here http://www.insidearm.com/daily/debt-collection-news/debt-collection/weak-fdcpa-claims-fall-upon-scrutiny/):
In the recent Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals Case Hahn v. Triumph Partnerships LLC, the Court held that a technical misstatement in a collection letter regarding the delineation of interest and costs on an account (where the account balance was correctly stated) was not actionable because the purported FDCPA violation was not material. In that case, the Court wrote:
We do not see any reason why materiality should not be equally required in an action based on §1692e. The statute is designed to provide information that helps consumers to choose intelligently, and by definition immaterial information neither contributes to that objective (if the statement is correct) nor undermines it (if the statement is incorrect)…A statement cannot mislead unless it is material, so a false but non-material statement is not actionable.
This is terrible news for Todd! This is really going to cut into his business of obtaining free merchandise and services on credit and then scoring a second payday by suing the people who come looking for their money because they assaulted him with their words. Does this mean that Todd will be forced to finally get a part time job?