A summary of recent top FCRA, TCPA and FDCPA cases from ACA. Editor’s note: This article is available for members only.
5/14/2021 10:30
Each week, ACA International’s compliance team covers relevant case summaries for ACA members. Members may also submit cases for consideration to our compliance team at [email protected].
Here are the cases covered May 10-14:
Ramones v. Experian: Court Finds Debt Collector Failed to Reasonably Investigate Consumer’s Disputes
The debt collector in this case failed to properly investigate consumer’s disputes concerning a medical debt that belonged to the consumer’s father.
Continue reading the summary here.
Greifman v. Client Services: Legal Action Notice Did Not Overshadow
A New York district court found a collection letter’s statement referring to “possible legal action” did not overshadow the consumer’s validation rights.
Continue reading the summary here.
Mey v. All Access Telecom: TCPA Defendants Lose Motion to Dismiss
Under an FCC statement, telephone carriers may be liable for TCPA violations committed by collectors using the carriers’ phone networks.
Continue reading the summary here.
Isner-Monticello v. Nelnet: Student Loan Servicer Was Not a Debt Collector
A Florida district court dismissed a consumer’s claim because she failed to adequately allege that the defendant was a debt collector.
Continue reading the summary here.
Maddox v. Bank of NY: 2nd Circuit Finds Plaintiff Has Article III Standing Based on Violation of State Statute
Appellate court held state legislatures have the same power as Congress to create legally protectible interests whose invasion gives rise to Article III standing, and plaintiff had standing to sue bank that violated state mortgage satisfaction recording statute.
Continue reading the summary here.
Bennett v. Cielo: Court Refuses Consumers’ Request to Vacate Judgment
After the California Courts of Appeal reversed a judgment in a related matter, the consumers in this case, a husband and wife, moved to have the district court’s dismissal of their FDCPA claims vacated.
Continue reading the summary here.
Novak v. Mendez: Court Dismisses Foreclosure Related FDCPA Claim
Citing Obduskey v. McCarthy & Holthus LLP, a California district court held that entities such as law firms engaging in only nonjudicial foreclosure proceedings are not debt collectors within the meaning of the FDCPA.
Continue reading the summary here.
Mesa Labs v. Federal Insurance: TCPA Related Claims Excluded from Coverage per 7th Cir. Decision
Insurance policy excluding coverage for claims ‘arising out of’ the TCPA excludes the underlying conduct that forms the basis of the violation, even if liability for that underlying conduct might exist under a legal theory such as a common-law claim that is not expressly mentioned in the policy exclusion.
Continue reading the summary here.
Bank v. Gohealth: Serial TCPA Litigant has Standing to Bring Claim; But Case Dismissed
A magistrate judge filed a report and recommendation stating that the consumer had Article III standing to bring his claim, but the case should be dismissed with prejudice because the consumer did not establish direct liability, nor did he state a plausible claim for vicarious liability. The consumer and caller objected to the report and recommendation and the court adopted it in full.
Continue reading the summary here.
Flores v. Forster & Garbus: Court Dismisses FDCPA Claims but Declines to Award Costs and Fees
The court granted a defendant’s motion to dismiss the consumer’s fourth attempt to amend his complaint but declined to award the defendant’s attorney’s fees and costs.
Continue reading the summary here.
Chaitoff v. Experian: CRA Provided Reasonable Investigation of Consumer Dispute
The consumer in this case disputed a delinquent mortgage tradeline on his credit report because he had successfully modified his loan. The court held that consumer reporting agency’s (CRA) procedures for reinvestigating the consumer’s dispute were reasonable and granted summary judgment in favor of CRA.
Continue reading the summary here.
Pearson v. Apria: Collector Wins Summary Judgment on FDCPA Claims
Under the FDCPA, information regarding a debt was not conveyed directly or indirectly to plaintiff by the receipt of unanswered calls.
Continue reading the summary here.
- If you’ve recently obtained a judicial opinion that might benefit other ACA members, email it to us: [email protected].
- Join the discussion on legal and compliance topics with your fellow members on the Members Attorney Program community on The Hub. Simply log on to The Hub and select Members Attorney Program under the Communities menu.
- ACA’s Daily Decision is powered by ACA’s Litigation Advocacy and Compliance Teams.