In American Family Mutual Insurance Company v. Vein Centers for Excellence, Inc. et al., the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit upheld the Eastern District of Missouri’s ruling granting summary judgment in favor of American Family, finding that the insurer did not have to defend and indemnify its client Vein Centers,
Alice Hodsden
Missouri Supreme Court Refuses to Enforce Arbitration Based on Unavailability of Specific Arbitrator Identified in Arbitration Agreement
In A-1 Premium Acceptance, Inc. v. Hunter, the Missouri Supreme Court upheld the circuit court’s order denying counterclaim defendant A-1’s motion to compel arbitration because the plain language of the consumer arbitration agreement limited the arbitrator to the National Arbitration Forum (NAF). After the parties executed the arbitration agreement, NAF entered into a consent…
Reporting Outstanding Balance or Past Due Payments of Account Included in Ch. 13 Bankruptcy Plan Does Not Violate FCRA
The Southern District of West Virginia recently held that the reporting of an account being paid through a Chapter 13 bankruptcy plan as having an outstanding balance or past due payments does not violate the Fair Credit Reporting Act.
Plaintiffs Angela and Robert Barry alleged that Farm Bureau Bank FSB continued to report their account…
11th Circuit Rules That Consent Under TCPA Can Be Partially Revoked
The Eleventh Circuit ruled in Schweitzer v. Comenity Bank that a consumer can verbally revoke consent to be called on her cell phone using an automatic telephone dialing system “in the morning and during the work day.” As a result, the district court improperly granted summary judgment to the bank because a jury could find …
U.S. Supreme Court Rejects “Meaningful Attorney Involvement” Case
The United States Supreme Court declined a petition for writ of certiorari by a consumer regarding a collection letter on law firm letterhead with attorney signatures. The ruling of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in Tawanda Jones v. David Sean Dufek, Sr. was left in place, holding that a …
CFPB Sues Law Firms for Debt Relief Fees Disguised as Bankruptcy Fees
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau recently sued three law firms in the United States District Court for the Central District of California for collecting advance fees from consumers seeking debt relief. CFPB Director Richard Cordray stated that “[t]he defendants exploited consumers who were already suffering financial difficulties by tricking them into paying steep, illegal fees.”…
Validation Notice Including Request for Payment and Identifying Creditor by Acronym Does Not Violate FDCPA
The United States District Court for the Southern District of California recently dismissed all of a plaintiff’s claims in the putative class action Matthew Stuppiello v. Southwest Credit Systems, L.P. The Court held that a validation notice does not violate the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act by including a request for payment “and explain[ing] …
More Than One Call Per Day is Not Enough to Violate FDCPA; Consent Provided to Creditor Extends to Debt Collector Under TCPA
The United States District Court for the District of New Jersey recently held in Samuel Chisholm v. AFNI, Inc. that a debt collector “could not reasonably be found to violate” the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act by calling a consumer 18 times on his cell phone over the course of 13 days. All calls were …
Attorney Collecting Debt For a Debt Collector May Not Rely on Client’s Validation Notice
A district court in the Seventh Circuit has denied a motion to dismiss filed by a collection attorney acting on behalf of a debt collector client, holding that the plaintiff in the case could pursue her claim based on the attorney’s failure to provide his own § 1692g validation notice in an initial communication, even …
What’s In a Barcode?: District Court in Eleventh Circuit Adopts Benign Language Exception for Debtor’s Account Number
A district court in the Eleventh Circuit has joined the Fifth and Eighth circuits, along with a host of district courts throughout the country, in adopting the “benign language” exception to Section 1692f(8) of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, and has dismissed a claim based on a collection letter with a visible barcode containing …