A summary of recent top FCRA, TCPA and FDCPA cases from ACA. Editor’s note: This article is available for members only.
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 July 13-16:
Heinz v. Carrington: Appellate Court Affirms Summary Judgment for Debt Collector
Applying the "Animating Purpose Test," the 8th Circuit found communications by a mortgage servicer, when considered in light of their total substance, were not made “in connection with the collection of a debt” even though the mini-Miranda letter stated that the communication was for the purpose of collecting a debt.
Mattson v. New Penn Financial: Court Denies Class Certification in TCPA Case
The court granted the defendant’s motion to deny class certification on the plaintiff’s Telephone Consumer Protection Act claim, finding the plaintiff failed to meet the typicality requirements of Rule 23.
TransUnion v. Ramirez: Supreme Court Holds TCPA Plaintiffs Lack Standing
Providing guidance on its earlier decision in Spokeo, the court held that a speculative risk of future harm to consumers as a result of misleading alerts in their credit files, which had not been disseminated to third-party businesses, did not supply basis for Article III standing to seek retrospective damages.
Barnes v. Midland: Generalized Emotional Harms Not Enough for Standing in FDCPA Case
The court held that a consumer’s irritation, concern or feeling targeted or hustled by a collection letter were “generalized emotional harms that do not create standing.”
Skvarla v. MRS BPO: Court Finds Obligation Language Did Not Mislead Consumer
A New York district court found the “[w]e are not obligated to renew these offers” safe harbor disclosure was not false or misleading under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act as a matter of law.
Lawson v. Michigan First Credit: Credit Furnisher Wins Summary Judgment
The court found standing based on the Fair Credit Reporting Act plaintiff’s financial injury but granted summary judgment for the credit furnisher because tradelines indicating that the account had been closed provided historical information only, and were not inaccurate. The court warned the plaintiff’s counsel he could incur sanctions if he filed future baseless claims.
Hoven v. Buckles & Buckles: Law Firm's Garnishment Procedures Qualified for Bona Fide Error Defense
A Michigan district court found the law firm’s written procedures to record, track, and, if and as appropriate, back out post-judgment garnishment costs that were not recoverable were reasonably designed to avoid the error at issue.
Hancock v. Credit Pros: 3rd Circuit Considers Telephone Consumer Protection Act Standing Issue
The court granted a Telephone Consumer Protection Act defendant’s motion to amend its answer to add a defense, based on the Creasy decision, asserting the plaintiff lacked Article III standing, but the court did not address the merits of the defense.
- 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.