A rundown of recent top FCRA, TCPA and FDCPA cases from ACA.
09/15/2023 1:40 P.M.
3 minute read
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 Sept. 12-15:
Hall v. I.Q. Data International: Court Finds No Standing for Alleged Emotional Distress
The court dismissed the consumer’s claims that she was injured due to the defendant’s promise and then subsequent denial of the consumer’s request for a payment plan.
Daiss v. Pace: Court Holds Statute of Limitations Starts When Consumer is Served
A consumer sued a debt collection attorney for suing him for debt that he allegedly did not owe. The debt collector moved to have the consumer’s claims dismissed because the statute of limitations had run. The court held that it had not run out for one of the claims.
Continue reading the case summary here.
Pena v. Chaner: Consumer Awarded Reduced Statutory Damages in Default Judgment
A consumer sued a debt collector for violating the FDCPA by, among other things, leaving two voicemails that falsely threatened litigation over her personal debts. The debt collector failed to appear or respond to the complaint. The consumer moved for default judgment and sought $1,000 in statutory damages, $3,000 in actual damages, and $1,660.50 in attorney’s fees and costs.
Goodall v. LVNV Funding: Noncompliance with State Registration Law Raises FDCPA Claim
A Virginia district court found that registration under state law necessary for state-court collection action and suit brought by an unregistered collector raised FDCPA Section 1692e claims.
Espinosa v. Metcalf: Court Awards Emotional Damages on FDCPA Claims
The court held that some debt collectors violated the FDCPA by mistakenly towing the consumer’s son’s car to collect a debt the consumer owed and then towing the consumer’s leased vehicle. The court awarded damages to the consumers.
Bolich v. Nelnet Servicing: Court Finds That Continuing to Report Historical Late Payment History on an Account in Forbearance Did Not Violate the FCRA
A Florida district court held that it was not inaccurate or misleading to report an account as in forbearance and current, but continuing to report the past delinquencies was historically accurate and not misleading when the report is read as a whole.
Thomason v. World Finance: Court Finds That Repeated Reports of a Single Charge-Off Event Are Not Misleading
A Texas district court held that repeated reports of a single charge-off event are not misleading because reporting an account as charged off on a recurring basis only shows that the outstanding debt has yet to be repaid. The court also held that in the 5th Circuit, any claim against a furnisher under Section 1681a-2(b) must be based on a bona fide or meritorious dispute.
Carter v. Payback Repo: Repossession Company Unable to Prove It Was Covered by Arbitration Agreement
A debt collector attempted to repossess a consumer’s car while he was still in the vehicle. The consumer sued the debt collector for violating the FDCPA. The debt collector asked the court to enforce the arbitration provision in the consumer’s loan agreement.
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.