A rundown of recent top FCRA, TCPA and FDCPA cases from ACA.
11/23/2022 12:40 P.M.
2 minute
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 Nov. 22-23:
Nov. 22:
Hylton v. Titlemax: Court Finds No Reasonable Reliance Defense for Reassigned Numbers Under the TCPA
A consumer received several phone calls that were meant for the previous owner of her cellphone number. These calls were placed by a creditor attempting to collect a debt from the previous owner of the cellphone number. The consumer filed a class-action lawsuit against the creditor for violating the TCPA.
Continue reading the case summary here.
Hammoud v. Equifax: 6th Circuit Affirms Summary Judgment; CRA Investigation Procedures Held Reasonable
A CRA’s procedures were found reasonable as a matter of law when they relied on information obtained from reputable sources, and the information was not inaccurate on its face or otherwise inconsistent with the information the CRA already had on file.
Continue reading the case summary here.
Risher v. Adecco: Court Finds Chatbot is Not an Artificial or Prerecorded Voice
A California district court held that the use of a chatbot to send interactive text messages did not amount to the use of an artificial or prerecorded voice as contemplated by the TCPA.
Continue reading the summary here.
Nov. 23:
CFPB v. TransUnion: Court Finds Executive Can Be Found Liable in CFPB Enforcement Action
An Illinois district court found that an executive of a company could be held individually liable for violations of a consent order the company entered into with the CFPB.
Continue reading the summary here.
Carrasquillo v. CICA: Court Holds Letter Sent to Consumer in Bankruptcy Did Not Violate FDCPA
A consumer received a collection letter for a debt that was included in his bankruptcy. The consumer sued the debt collector for violating the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.
Continue reading the summary here.
Parsons v. United Collections Bureau: Consumer Alleged a Concrete Injury Under FCRA Based on Claim That Collector Viewed Consumer’s Credit Report Without a Permissible Purpose
The 4th Circuit stated for the first time that where a consumer alleged a collection agency obtained and viewed the consumer’s credit report from a CRA for an improper purpose under FCRA, the consumer stated a sufficient concrete injury for Article III standing purposes.
Continue reading the summary here.
Visit the Industry Advancement Fund webpage for more Daily Decision recaps and compliance resources.
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.
To receive notifications about ACA content—including member alerts, upcoming events and new products—text ALERTS to 96997. Message and data rates may apply. Message frequency will vary. To opt-out at any time, reply STOP to any message we send.
