Court Rulings Force Debt Collectors to Revisit Validation Language

  • Email
  • Print
  • Printing Articles

    1. Click here to print!
    2. ...or print directly from your browser by choosing File > Print... from the menu or by pressing [Ctrl + P]. Our printer-friendly stylesheet will make sure extraneous website stuff isn't printed.
    3. You're done!

    Close this message.

  • Comments
  • RSS

Most consumer advocates and collectors agree that the validation language required by the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) is stilted and obscure. However, the validation notice is a foundational document of the debt collection process.

Two recent cases in different Federal Courts of Appeal — with different results — examined questions about the wording of specific validation notices and have caused concern for collectors about the language used.

Attorneys John Rossman and Mike Poncin examine these recent rulings in the latest episode of ARM legal podcast The Debt Collection Drill. They also provide tips and specific language to use for validation notices in debt collection letters.

Listen to the 11-minute episode below:

FDCPA Victories Finally Limit “Least Sophisticated Consumer” Standard

(If you can’t see the audio player above, please visit http://traffic.libsyn.com/thedrill/TDCD_ep36.mp3 to listen to the podcast)

Cases discussed in this podcast:

 

  • Email
  • Print
  • Printing Articles

    1. Click here to print!
    2. ...or print directly from your browser by choosing File > Print... from the menu or by pressing [Ctrl + P]. Our printer-friendly stylesheet will make sure extraneous website stuff isn't printed.
    3. You're done!

    Close this message.

  • Comments
  • RSS

Posted in Collection Law Firms, Collection Laws and Regulations, Debt Collection, FDCPA, Featured Post, Mail Services .

×
Subscribe to our email newsletters

Continuing the Discussion

We welcome and encourage readers to comment and engage in substantive exchanges over topics on insideARM.com. Users must always follow our Terms of Use. Also know that your comment will be deleted if you: use profanity, engage in any kind of hate speech, post an incoherent or irrelevant thought, make a point of targeting anyone, or do anything else we find unsavory. Your comment will be posted under your current Display Name, shown below. If you'd like to change your Display Name, you must update it on the My Profile page.

  • avatar Raymond says:

    There has to be, needs to be legislative change to the 1972 FDCPA. These two opinions are examples, though there were several in the past that show debt collection agencies are targets for lawyers. In the end these lawsuits only benefit lawyers. Clarity of other federal regulations is needed as well. Otherwise, all of the expenses and time preparing for the CFPB is money down the drain for the debt collection industry.

Leave a Reply