The United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York has dismissed a debtor’s claim that a collection letter stating “Non-interest Charges & Fees: $0.00” was misleading under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act because an unsophisticated consumer could mistakenly believe that non-interest charges and fees might be added in the future. The
Troutman Sanders Expands Financial Services Litigation Practice
We are pleased to announce that Andrew B. Buxbaum has joined the firm’s Financial Services Litigation practice as Of Counsel in the Richmond Office. He joins the firm from SunTrust Banks, Inc., where he was First Vice President & Senior Counsel of Substantial Litigation.
At SunTrust, Andrew managed major litigation, class actions, government investigations and
House Finance Committee Approves CFPB Reforms
On September 13, the U.S. House of Representatives Financial Services Committee passed an amended version of the Financial CHOICE Act, which will result in significant changes to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau if it becomes law. The amended CHOICE Act would reform the CFPB’s structure and limit its regulatory authority, while also repealing several sections
District Court Dismisses FDCPA Action Upon Finding of Proper Validation Notice
On August 23, the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey dismissed an action against a collection agency on issues related to a validation notice. In Rosa v. Encore Receivable Management, Inc. et al., No. 15-cv-02311, the plaintiff alleged that the collection agency sent letters to at least 50 people in New
Georgia Debt Collectors Banned from Debt Collection Business
In August, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia entered the Federal Trade Commission’s stipulated order banning a group of debt collectors from the debt collection business and collectively fining them $4.4 million.
The FTC filed a Complaint in November 2015 against defendants National Client Services LLC, Omar Smith, and Ernest
New York Debt Collectors Banned from Debt Collection Business
In August, the United States District Court for the Western District of New York entered the Federal Trade Commission’s stipulated order banning a group of debt collectors from engaging in collection activities and imposing $27 million in fines.
In May 2015, the FTC filed a Complaint against defendants Unified Global Group LLC; ARM WNY, LLC;
Eleventh Circuit Dismisses FDCPA Case Against Debt Collector Based on Failure to Allege Consumer Transaction
On July 28, in a decision favorable for the collection industry, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed a district court’s dismissal of an action against defendant Seattle Service Bureau, Inc., a debt collector, for claims alleged under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) and the Florida Consumer Collection
U.S. District Court Rules Letter with Internal Reference Number Does Not Violate Fair Debt Collection Practices Act
A federal judge in the Eastern District of New York ruled that a debt collection company’s internal reference number, which may have been visible through a glassine envelope, did not violate the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”).
In the case, the Plaintiff, Wendy Torres Rodriguez, brought an FDCPA claim against Defendant I.C. Systems, Inc.,
TCPA Case Dismissed on Spokeo Reasoning
The District Court for the Southern District of California recently granted a motion to dismiss in a Telephone Consumer Protection Act case based on the Supreme Court’s decision in Spokeo, finding that the plaintiff failed to put forth evidence proving an injury-in-fact.
In Romero v. Department Stores National Bank, the defendant creditors allegedly
Fourth Circuit Rejects FDCPA Liability For Filing Proofs of Claim On Time-Barred Debt
On August 25, 2016, the Fourth Circuit held in In re Eric Dubois, Case No. 15-1945, that filing a proof of claim based on a time-bared debt in a Chapter 13 bankruptcy does not violate the Fair Debt Collection Protection Act (FDCPA) when the applicable state statute of limitations does not extinguish the debt.