On May 5, 2016, the CFPB announced proposed rules that would further restrict the ability of financial institutions to enter into mandatory arbitration clauses with consumers, including an outright ban on provisions that would prohibit consumers from pursuing class actions in court. The proposed rules do not forbid all mandatory arbitration clauses, however. Financial institutions
Fifth Circuit Dismisses FCRA and FDCPA Claims Due to Commercial Nature of Underlying Transaction
On March 29, in Hall v. Phenix Investigations, Inc., No. 15-10533, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 5786 (5th Cir. Tex. Mar. 29, 2016), the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed dismissal of an action alleging claims under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”) and Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”). The
District Court Dismisses FCRA Claims as Time-Barred
On April 26, in Verkuilen v. Business Info. Group, Inc., No. 14-cv-400, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 55392 (E.D. Wis. Apr. 26, 2016), the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin granted Defendant’s motion for partial summary judgment as to Plaintiff’s FCRA claims on the basis that they were time-barred. The FCRA
Eighth Circuit Joins Minority in Circuit Split as to Ascertainability Standard for Class Actions
On May 3, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit reversed a lower court’s rejection of class certification in Sandusky Wellness Ctr., LLC v. Medtox Scientific, Inc., a case brought under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) relating to junk faxes sent by a lead testing company. In its opinion, the
CFPB Takes Action Against Debt Collection Law Firm and Related Debt Buyer
On April 25, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau entered into consent orders with the debt collection law firm Pressler & Pressler, LLC, two principal partners, and New Century Financial Services, Inc., a debt buyer, for the defendants’ alleged violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. The consent orders require Pressler and the
FTC Takes Action Against Deceptive Marketing
According to the FTC’s complaint filed in October 2014, Health Formulas, LLC and its related entities and principals used telemarketing, the Internet, and print, radio, and television advertisements to deceptively pitch a variety of dietary supplements and health products. The FTC claimed that Health Formulas tricked consumers into disclosing their credit and debit card
Fourth Circuit Holds Data Incident Covered by Insurance Policy
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit recently affirmed a district court order, holding that a company’s allegedly improper disclosure of personal information was covered by its general liability policy even though no third parties accessed the data.
In the underlying action, plaintiffs alleged that medical records company Portal Healthcare negligently failed
Supreme Court Deems Statistical Evidence Admissible in Class Action
In March, the Supreme Court, in a 6-2 decision, held in Tyson Foods, Inc. v. Bouaphekeo that the district court did not err in certifying and maintaining a class of employees who alleged violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act, notwithstanding the employees’ reliance on “representative evidence” to determine the number of additional hours
Maryland Legislature Passes Bill Preventing Revival or Extension of Statute of Limitations for Debt Collection Based on Consumer Complaint
In April, the Maryland General Assembly approved legislation on consumer debt collection that addresses how statutes of limitation may be calculated against consumers.
Senate Bill 771, which addresses certain “debt buyers” and “debt collectors,” provides that “certain actions may not revive or extend a certain statute of limitations prohibiting a debt buyer or a certain
District Court Denies Motion for Class Certification Under FCRA
In Jones v. Sterling Infosystems, 1:14cv3076 (S.D.N.Y. 2016), the district court recently denied class certification against a background screening company that was alleged to have violated 15 U.S.C. § 1681k(a) by not sending out the notice envisioned under § 1681k(a)(1) at the time that criminal record information was transmitted to employers.
The court denied