A rundown of recent top FCRA, TCPA and FDCPA cases from ACA.
10/06/2023 2:25 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 Oct. 3-6:
Oct. 3:
Brady v. Vengroff Williams Inc. & VWI Subrogation: Court Holds Subrogation Claims Are Not Subject to the FDCPA
A Pennsylvania district court held that a subrogation claim does not meet the definition of debt under the FDCPA, and therefore, the defendant’s actions in attempting to collect a subrogation claim from the plaintiff did not violate the FDCPA.
Continue reading the case summary here.
Lezark v. I.C. System: Court Finds Consumer Alleged a Concrete Injury
A consumer petitioned the court to allow him to file a second amended complaint in his lawsuit against a debt collector. The debt collector claimed that the consumer lacked standing.
Continue reading the case summary here.
Oct. 4:
Bellini v. Patenaude & Felix: Court Finds Safe Harbor for MVN Only Applies to Reg F and Not FDCPA
A consumer received a validation letter from a debt collector that used the model validation notice form. The consumer claimed the letter violated the FDCPA. The court held that the safe harbor that Reg F created did not apply to any violation of the FDCPA that might be in the letter.
Continue reading the summary here.
Joseph Smith v. Radius Glob. Sols: Court Rejects FDCPA Letter Vendor Claim on Standing But Finds Possible State Standing on Rosenthal Act Claim
In remanding the claims to state court, a California federal district court held that the plaintiff’s letter vendor claims did not give rise to standing under the FDCPA, but the court found that the letter vendor claims may confer standing in state court under the California’s Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.
Continue reading the summary here.
Oct. 5:
Moore v. Merchants & Medical Credit Corporation: Pennsylvania Court Remands Hunstein Claim to State Court for Lack of Standing
A Pennsylvania district court remanded the plaintiff’s claims to state court, finding there was no standing because the debt collector’s use of a letter vendor did not cause the plaintiff any injury.
Continue reading the summary here.
Milgram v. Chase Bank: Data Furnisher Not Required to Reinvestigate Fraud Claim
A consumer who owned a business became the victim of identity theft when her employee opened a credit card in her name and used her business accounts to pay down the charges. The debts were reported to the CRAs. The consumer disputed the debts, but the data furnisher refused to remove the unauthorized charges. The district court concluded the data furnisher’s investigation was not unreasonable. The consumer appealed it decision.
Continue reading the summary here.
Oct. 6:
Hejmadi v. Midland Funding: Third Circuit Remands Case Compelling Arbitration for District Court to Decide if Arbitration Was Waived
Two consumers appealed a district court’s decision that the debt buyer had not waived its right to arbitrate their dispute.
Continue reading the summary here.
Loughry v. M&T Mortgage Corp., PNC Bank: A Pennsylvania District Court Found a Consumer Lacked Standing to Assert FCRA Claims
A district court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania held that the consumer lacked standing to assert her claims under the FCRA because she failed to allege that she was injured. Additionally, the court noted that even if the plaintiff had standing, the defendants’ actions did not violate the FCRA, because they conducted reasonable investigations and promptly removed the erroneous information.
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.