On September 3, Judge Edmond E. Chang of the Northern District of Illinois issued a decision stating that the display of a series of letters and numbers – in which the debtor’s account number was allegedly embedded – through an envelope window does not violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.
In Schmid v. Transworld
On September 21, the United States District Court for the District of Rhode Island held that an out-of-state debt collector did not violate the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act when it called the debtor using two phone numbers with a local area code.
In Bien v. Stellar Recovery, Inc., Plaintiff argued that Stellar’s practice
On August 4, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois held that legal pleadings can violate the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.
In Marquez, et al. v. Weinstein, Pinson, P.S., et al., the plaintiffs argued that a law firm and its client violated § 1692e of the FDCPA by including
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the Federal Trade Commission jointly filed an amicus brief with the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in Bock v. Pressler & Pressler, LLP. In the case, a U.S. district court previously ruled that a debt collection law firm violated the Fair Debt Collection
Over the past two weeks, two separate federal district courts in New York held that having a consumer’s account number visible on the outside of an envelope containing letters from debt collection agencies does not, by itself, violate the FDCPA. In these cases, both Judge Colleen McMahon and Judge John Curtin, of the Southern
On July 14, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri granted United Collection Bureau’s motion for summary judgment in an individual action brought under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Troutman Sanders served as counsel for UCB in this matter. See Martin v. United Collection Bureau, Inc., No. 4:14cv804-JAR, 2015 U.S.
District Judge William J. Nealon of the Middle District of Pennsylvania issued two recent decisions holding that both a Quick Response (“QR”) code and a bar code appearing through the glassine window of an envelope containing a collection letter violate section 1692f(8) of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, which prohibits “using any language or
Fair Debt Collection Practices Act lawsuits increased 16 percent from June 2014 to June 2015, according to a report issued by WebRecon. The report also noted that FDCPA lawsuits increased from 885 to 1,129 from May to June this year. According to the report, Fair Credit Reporting Act lawsuits also increased 22.7 percent from
On July 14, a federal judge in Atlanta denied Frederick J. Hanna & Associates’ motion to dismiss in Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Frederick J. Hanna & Associates PC, which the CFPB filed against the law firm arising out of alleged violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and Consumer Financial Protection Act.
On June 30, in Miljkovic v. Shafritz and Dinkin, P.A., the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit held in a case of first impression that representations made by an attorney in court filings during the course of debt-collection litigation are actionable under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) but that