The Northern District of Illinois is a consumer-friendly jurisdiction, but even it has its limits on what it will allow plaintiff’s counsel to do. The most recent example is in the court’s decision in Irvin v. Nationwide Credit & Collection, No. 18-cv-2945 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 17, 2019). This case involves a credit report dispute that plaintiff’s counsel faxed to a debt collector. On its surface, it seems pretty straight-forward. However, the court found a problem with the specific fax number used.
[article_ad]
Plaintiffs received collection letters from defendant, which included a specific fax number in the contact information. Plaintiffs’ counsel—from Community Lawyers Group, Ltd.—sent their typical and often used credit report dispute letter to defendant. However, rather than faxing the dispute letter to the fax number provided on the letter, plaintiffs’ counsel did an internet search and sent the dispute to a fax number listed for the debt collector on an industry association’s website. This fax number was no longer in use by the debt collector for business purposes and it was never a number used for collection communications, but plaintiff’s counsel had a confirmation notice that the fax was sent successfully. Ultimately, defendant never processed the notice and continued to report the account without marking it as disputed.
View this content by subscribing
Please register to unlock this content
I already have an account. Log in