A recent decision out of the Eastern District of Wisconsin provides an important reminder to loan servicers that a statement in a debt collection letter could be considered misleading under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”), 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq., even if the letter is “literally correct.”
The case is Reitz v.
On June 29, 2020, the United State House of Representatives passed the Protecting Your Credit Act of 2020, H.R. 5332. The purpose of the bill is to “ensure that consumer reporting agencies are providing fair and accurate information reporting in consumer reports” by amending certain provisions of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”).
If the
This month, in Charvat v. LE Energy, LLC, No. 2:19-cv-1325, 2019 WL 3891830 (S.D. Ohio Aug. 19, 2019), an Ohio district court judge denied a defendant’s motion to dismiss a plaintiff’s allegation of violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act when an unidentified entity placed a telemarketing call to the plaintiff’s residential phone number,
On July 9, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals entered a non-precedential opinion upholding a district court’s ruling that a third-party collection agency could not invoke a creditor’s mandatory arbitration agreement against a plaintiff that brought claims against the collection agency for violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act on the facts before the
In Witt v. United Cos. Lending Corp. (“In re Witt”), 113 F.3d 508 (4th Cir. 1997), the Fourth Circuit held that Chapter 13 debtors are not permitted to bifurcate undersecured home mortgage loans into separate secured and unsecured claims. In re Witt, 113 F.3d at 509. Recently, the Court overruled this twenty-two-year-old decision