Each week, ACA International’s compliance team covers relevant case summaries for ACA members. Here’s a rundown of recent top FCRA, TCPA and FDCPA cases we’ve covered.
03/28/2024 1:30 P.M.
2.5 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 March 26-28:
March 26:
Williams v. LVNV Funding: Consumer Failed to Prove She Suffered an Injury-In-Fact
A consumer sued a debt buyer for failing to remove a dispute code from her credit report after she no longer disputed her debt.
Continue reading the case summary here.
Reppy & Reppy v. Cenlar FSB, Inc. & Mickel Law Firm: Court Finds Law Firm Was Not Exempt from FDCPA
An Arkansas federal district court held that while a law firm was exempt from the Arkansas Statutory Foreclosure Act and the Arkansas Fair Debt Collections Practices Act based a state law attorney exemption from prosecution, it was not exempt from the FDCPA.
Continue reading the case summary here.
March 27:
Manzanarez v. Madera Collection Services: No Standing for FDCPA Claims Related to Undated Model Validation Notice
A California federal district court found a plaintiff failed to show that he was injured by the collection notice’s lack of a date. Accordingly, the court dismissed the plaintiff’s claims for lack of Article III standing.
Continue reading the summary here.
Greene v. Experian: Power of Attorney Does Not Allow a Consumer to Represent an Aggrieved Party in Federal Court
A consumer filed an FCRA case on behalf of another party who claimed she was the victim of identity theft. The consumer claimed the other party had assigned the FCRA claim to the consumer.
Continue reading the summary here.
March 28:
Marks v. Javitch Block LLC: Court Finds Receipt of Single Letter After Request for Email-Only Communication Did Not State a Claim Under the FDCPA
The court determined that the consumer had standing to bring a claim under the FDCPA on an invasion of privacy theory of injury based on his receipt of a written letter after his request for email communication only. Nevertheless, the court found that the consumer failed to state a claim under FDCPA Section 1692(c) because he failed to allege that he was contacted at an inconvenient time or place.
Continue reading the summary here.
Anderson v. Franklin Credit Management: Court Examines Whether Attempt to Collect Time-Barred Debt Was a Violation of the FDCPA
A consumer sued a debt buyer, a debt collection attorney and a loan servicer for attempting to collect a debt where the statute of limitations had run.
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.