A judge in the Eastern District of New York recently discussed in an opinion that Fair Debt Collection Practices (FDCPA) cases based on technicalities don’t serve the underlying purpose of the FDCPA to protect consumers.
Ocampo v. Client Services, Inc., No. 1:18-cv-4326 (E.D.N.Y. Jul. 3, 2019) centered on a claim that a collection letter did not properly identify the creditor to whom the debt was owed. The letter stated “Re: Synchrony Walmart MC" and this, according to plaintiff, does not satisfy the FDCPA's requirement.
The court disagreed. The court reasoned that a least sophisticated consumer would not be confused by the letter since it clearly lays out that the account has been placed for collections and the letter only lists one entity that could be the creditor: Synchrony Walmart MC. Considering there was only one entity named, the court did not agree that including “Re” somehow made it more confusing.
View this content by subscribing
Please register to unlock this content
I already have an account. Log in
