A summary of recent top FCRA, TCPA and FDCPA cases from ACA. Editor’s note: This article is available for members only.
8/27/2021 9:30
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 August 24 – August 27:
August 24
Borden v. eFinancial: Consumer Did Not Plausibly Allege ATDS Was Used to Send Text Messages
A consumer claimed eFinancial sent its insurance text message advertisements using an ATDS.
Continue reading the summary here.
Boardman v. Green Dot: Cellphone May Plausibly be Alleged as Residential Line Under the TCPA
North Carolina district court finds that a cellphone may plausibly be alleged as residential for purposes of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
Continue reading the summary here.
Thomas v. Unifin: Court Applies Hunstein, Keeps FDCPA Claims in Federal Court
In a companion decision like Keller v. Northstar, U.S. District Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman from the Northern District of Illinois found a consumer alleged an injury-in-fact by claiming a collector using a third-party letter vendor violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act at Sections 1692c(b) and 1692f when it disclosed information about his debt to the vendor, and the court denied the consumer’s motion to remand.
Continue reading the summary here.
Keller v. Northstar: Court Applies Hunstein, Keeps FDCPA Claims in Federal Court
In a companion decision like Thomas v. Unifin, U.S. District Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman from the Northern District of Illinois again found consumers alleged an injury-in-fact by claiming a collector using a third-party letter vendor violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act at Sections 1692c(b) and 1692f when it disclosed information about their debts to the vendor, and the court denied the consumers’ motion to remand.
Continue reading the summary here.
August 25
Garrett v. Finan. Bus. & Cons. Sol.: Collector Wins Summary Judgment on All FDCPA Counts
A Colorado court rejected consumer’s assertion that collector’s statement “CALLING FOR FURTHER INFORMATION OR MAKING A PAYMENT IS NOT A SUBSTITUTE FOR DISPUTING THE DEBT,” was false or misleading, or that it overshadowed required disclosures under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. The court granted summary judgment for the collector on all claims.
Continue reading the summary here.
Stephenson v. Midland: Letters Mentioning Litigation Did Not Violate the FDCPA
The consumer in this case received letters from a debt collector stating that if she did not contact the debt collector or attempt to resolve her debt, it would be sent to an attorney to review and potentially litigate. The consumer claimed the letters threatened legal action that the debt collector did not intend to take.
Continue reading the summary here.
Twardowski v. Credit Management: Confusion and Resulting Consultation with a Lawyer Not Sufficient for Standing
The court found a consumer’s stress, with no physical manifestations and no qualified medical diagnosis, combined with confusion and consultation with a lawyer after getting a collection letter were not sufficient to establish standing.
Continue reading the summary here.
August 26
Albright v. Clayton and Myrick: Idle Threats to Sue Consumer Brings Debt Collector to Court
The consumer received two collection letters from a law firm which stated in part that if she did not settle her debt, the law firm would contact local counsel to sue her. The law firm never sued on these types of accounts. The consumer moved for summary judgment.
Continue reading the summary here.
Vazzano v. Receivable Mgmt Services: FDCPA Defendant Wins Judgment on All Claims
A Texas court rejected a consumer’s claim that her dispute of a debt accompanied by her demand that further communications be in writing constituted a cease communication request and, because the collector only sent one letter, the court granted judgment on the pleadings for the collector with respect to all claims.
Continue reading the summary here.
Lupia v. Medicredit: 10th Circuit Finds Intangible Harm Enough for Standing
The 10th Circuit affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment, finding the consumer’s claim that the debt collector intruded on her seclusion constituted a concrete injury.
Continue reading the summary here.
August 27
Altman v. Zwicker & Associates: Letter Offering Credit Card Application if Balance Paid in Full Not Misleading Under FDCPA
The consumer in this case received a letter that stated if he paid his credit card debt in full, he would be eligible to receive a credit card application. The letter listed the conditions for denial of the application. The consumer sued the debt collector claiming letter was false and misleading under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.
Continue reading the summary here.
Magdy v. I.C.System, Inc: Third Party Cannot Pursue FDCPA Claim
An attorney receiving a letter from a collector who didn’t represent the debtor whose accounts were at issue cannot file a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act claim for wrongful communication with a third party because the attorney was not a “consumer” under the FDCPA.
Continue reading the summary here.
Boardman v. Green Dot: Cellphone May Plausibly be Alleged as Residential Line Under the TCPA
North Carolina district court finds that a cellphone may plausibly be alleged as residential for purposes of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
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.