On Monday a federal judge in Pennsylvania ruled that, as a matter of law, the language in a letter sent to a consumer that discussed 1099(c) tax consequences would be considered a “false representation or deceptive means to collect or attempt to collect a debt” by the least sophisticated debtor.” The case is Balon v. Enhanced Recovery Company, Inc. (Case No. 3-16-cv-0410, U.S.D.C. Middle District of Pennsylvania).
A copy of the court’s memorandum can be found here.
On July 11, 2016 insideARM published an article about this case written by Thomas Dominczyk, Attorney at Law and member of the Maurice Wutscher law firm. That article discussed the court’s June 2, 2016 denial of a motion by Enhanced Recovery Company, Inc., (ERC) to dismiss the case. In that article, Dominczyk succinctly summarized the facts of the case:
View this content by subscribing
Please register to unlock this content
I already have an account. Log in
