FDCPA Lawsuits Projected to Decline in 2012

  • 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

The total number of lawsuits against ARM firms filed in 2012 by consumers claiming violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) is now projected to fall under the number filed in 2011, according to a company that tracks the cases.

Even with a slight surge in FDCPA case filings in the first half of October, the total number of such suits filed in 2012 is 8 percent below those filed at the same point in 2011.

“We can now project FDCPA claims will finish the year at around 10,500 suits, down from 12,018 in 2011,” said Jack Gordon, whose company, WebRecon LLC, tracks suits filed under consumer statutes.

FDCPA cases filed in 2012 have been tracking lower than 2011 for most of the year. But around mid-year, it became apparent that 2012 could see a year-over-year decline.

If the total number of cases claiming violations of the FDCPA does decrease in 2012, it would mark a turnaround in the meteoric rise in such cases over the past few years.

But lawsuits against ARM firms claiming violations of other statutes have filled the void this year. For example, Gordon says that suits filed under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) and Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) will be far higher in 2012 than in 2011. As it stands now, TCPA suits are up 50 percent from 2011 while FCRA suits are up 16 percent.

  • 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 Laws and Regulations, Debt Collection, Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), FDCPA, Featured Post, TCPA .

×
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 todd-bean says:

    The FDCPA is always good with their strict liability and its least sophisticated consumer standard, the 1K cap on statutory damages does not make it near as appealing as other consumer protection laws.

    I think the TCPA is where it’s at right now. With the courts throwing the burden on the collector to show the consumer gave consent to be robo called, TCPA and its allowing of stacking of violations and even trebling them is where the consumer focus will be.

    Yes, you can always throw in a per se violation of the FDCPA by violation the TCPA but with hardly nobody having landlines and the incredible amount of extra time and expense to manually dial numbers, TCPA is the new FDCPA.

    The recent 9th CIR and 8th CIR cases throwing the burden 100% to the collector makes calling a cell phone using a auto dialer basically an automatic TCPA violation. Wait until you get about 20 or 30 of those you can stack and maybe even treble, and much better than having 30 FDCPA violations that just get you the 1K statutory max plus a grand or two in actual damages.

  • avatar jessie-gomez says:

    When the collection agency learn to lay down the phone and do everything by the good old united states posted services you will have low life deadbeat consumers trying to get a violation on the collection agency.

  • avatar FriendoftheCourt says:

    Webrecon’s sample set does not register many state-court filed actions.

    Take the projections with a healthy grain of salt.

  • avatar todd-bean says:

    Jessie,

    For once I finally agree with you (somewhat). It’s mind boggling why a collector will call and call and call when the consumer has bascially said get lost I’m not paying. Eventually you tick them off to the point where they don’t just get mad, they get even. Then they hook the recorder up and say what will happen if I don’t pay and a week later your geting the letter of representation from the consumer attorney, and this was a debt the consumer was never going to pay anyway. Now you’re stuck paying the debtor when you could have just letft them alone or sued them.

    One call and a letter and move on. Sue or leave them alone. Shoot Jessie, I wrote a collector I REFUSE TO PAY THIS DEBT. That’s a C&D and it pretty much shows you’re not collecting. A week later, ring, ring, ring, ring……. sue, sue, sue, sue was my response.

    Finally, Jessie, I can say you’re actually right !!

  • avatar jessie-gomez says:

    Todd, If we get a C & D letter we file suit and let a judge decide who is right.

  • avatar todd-bean says:

    Dang Jessie, two times in one day that I totally agree with you. That is the way it should be. Sue or move on. I am surprised that you would be following the FDCPA and ceasing communication. That does not seem to be your style.

  • avatar jessie-gomez says:

    Mr Bean, my style is winning. The consumers don’t like US mail at all they love being on the phone. We validate a debit with a consumer and got a letter back like this. YOU NEED TO GET ON THE PHONE WITH ME NOW.

Leave a Reply