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.
04/26/2024 10:55 A.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 April 23-26:
April 23:
Brown v. Brock & Scott, PLLC: Court Finds Plaintiff’s Dispute Acted as a Waiver of Her Cease Communication Request
A Georgia federal district court held that the plaintiff’s explicit requests for verification of her debts after her cease communication letter amounted to a waiver of her protection under Section 1692c(c) of the FDCPA.
Continue reading the case summary here.
LeBaron v. Drs. & Merchants Credit: Utah Court Grants Consumer’s Appeal When Debt Collector’s License Lapsed
A consumer claimed that a debt collector filed a suit against her when it was not licensed in the state of Utah, resulting in an FDCPA violation. She appealed to the Utah state court of appeals.
Continue reading the case summary here.
April 24:
Rodriguez-Ocasio, Bally-Choonoo & Linis v. Midland Credit Management: Court Finds No Standing for FDCPA Claims About Deficient Validation Notice
A New Jersey federal district court held that the plaintiffs failed to alleged how they were harmed by the defendant’s omission from collection notices and explanation of the plaintiffs’ right to request the name and address of the original creditor.
Continue reading the summary here.
In re: LeTennier Sr.: Bankruptcy Court Holds FDCPA Claim Cannot Be Used to Object to Proof of Claim
consumer objected to a debt buyer’s proof of claim that was based on a default judgment it had obtained before the bankruptcy was filed.
Continue reading the summary here.
April 25:
Barclays Bank Delaware v. Schmaltz: Consumer Fails to Remove Case From State Court
A consumer, who was a defendant in a state collection action, had the case removed to federal court. The creditor requested that the court remand the case to state court.
Continue reading the summary here.
Sofaly v. Portfolio Recovery Associates: Court Asks FDCPA Plaintiffs to Show Cause Why They Should Not Face Sanctions
A Pennsylvania federal district court ordered the plaintiffs to show cause why they should not be subject to sanctions for their scheme to “entrap” or “induce” the defendant into technical violations of the FDCPA.
Continue reading the summary here.
April 26:
Holden v. Holiday Inn Club Vacations: 11th Circuit Declines to Impose a Bright-Line Rule Under FCRA
The 11th Circuit declined to impose a bright-line rule that only purely factual or transcription errors are actionable under the FCRA. Rather, the court held that “in determining whether a claimed inaccuracy is potentially actionable under [§ 1681s-2], a court must determine … whether the information in dispute is ‘objectively and readily verifiable.’”
Continue reading the summary here.
Harris v. Broker Sols., Inc.: Ninth Circuit Finds Data Furnisher’s Investigation Was Reasonable
Two consumers appealed the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of the data furnisher. The 9th Circuit affirmed the district court’s decision.
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.