In Abdollahzadeh v. Mandarich Law Group, LLP, the Seventh Circuit affirmed summary judgment for a debt collector under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, finding that its procedures to prevent the collection of a time-barred debt were reasonable enough to support a bona fide error defense. 

As background,

On March 22, 2018, the Governor of West Virginia signed into law HB 4285, which amends select provisions of the West Virginia Safe Mortgage Licensing Act (“WVSMLA”). The Bill makes three changes to the WVSMLA, which regulates the licensing requirements for mortgage loan originators.

First, the Bill increases the state license application fee, which appears

On March 22, 2018, the Governor of West Virginia signed into law HB 3143, which amends select provisions of the West Virginia Consumer Credit Protection Act (WVCCPA).  First, the Bill amends section 46A-4-101 to clarify that the licensing provisions of the WVCCPA do not apply to any “collection agency” as defined by the Collection Agency

The operators of two websites have agreed to settle claims with the Federal Trade Commission relating to allegations that they failed to take reasonable steps to secure consumers’ data, which allowed hackers to breach both websites. The FTC issued a statement on both cases, which can be found here.

One case was filed against

The District Court for the Southern District of Texas recently awarded a defendant summary judgment because the defendant’s call records directly contradicted the plaintiff’s vague recollection of events.  The Plaintiff in Young v. Medicredit Inc., No. H-17-3701, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71020 (S.D. Tex. Apr. 26, 2019), asserted claims against Defendant Medicredit Inc. (“Medicredit”)

In a recently issued opinion, a federal district court judge in the Eastern District of Wisconsin found that a debt collector’s use of Seventh Circuit-approved interest and fees safe harbor language in a collection letter could constitute a false and misleading representation under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act where the plaintiff alleged that

On April 22, the Washington State Legislature passed H.B. 1071, a bill designed to strengthen the state’s data breach notification law. The bill, which will take effect March 1, 2020, if and when signed, includes the following amendments:

  1. Expands the definition of “personal information” – Previously, “personal information” was limited to an individual’s name,

Addressing claims based on parsing language in a collection letter, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed dismissal under Rule 12’s plausibility standard of claims asserted under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, finding the alleged representations were not misleading as a matter of law.

In Klein v. Credico Inc., the debtor alleged that

Contractual provisions requiring consumers to bring claims in arbitration must be carefully worded to ensure they encompass all claims, including those asserted under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. A recent decision by the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, Abedi v. New Age Med. Clinic PA, No. 18-14680-KM-SCM, 2019 U.S.

Washington was close to becoming the next state with a comprehensive privacy law designed to enhance consumers’ privacy rights, but the bill recently failed to pass the state House of Representatives.

The Washington Privacy Act (SB 5376) was introduced in the Washington State Senate in January after California enacted the landmark Consumer Privacy Act (“CCPA”)