A rundown of recent top FCRA, TCPA and FDCPA cases from ACA.
01/27/2023 10:45 P.M.
4 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 Jan. 24-27:
Jan. 24:
Hortron v. Convergent Outsoucing: Magistrate Judge Recommends Dismissal with Leave to Amend for Poorly Pled Case
A consumer sued a debt collector in small claims court for violating the FDCPA and FCRA. The debt collector had the case removed to federal court and moved to dismiss the case.
Continue reading the case summary here.
Makhnevich v. Bougopoulos: Court Grants Summary Judgment for Defendants in FDCPA Case
Statements made within court documents as part of litigation may provide the basis for FDCPA claims but are subject to summary judgment if the statements do not involve a material violation, a factor not typically found where the statements are part of pleadings and thus made to the court, not to the consumer.
Continue reading the case summary here.
Saleh v. Miami Gardens: A Florida State Appellate Court Finds a FACTA Plaintiff Must Plead an Injury-in-Fact
A Florida state appellate court found that a plaintiff did not meet the state’s standing requirements to assert his FACTA claims because he did not allege an injury-in-fact.
Continue reading the case summary here.
Jan. 25:
Rendon v. Cherry Creek Mortg: Accessing Credit Report Without Permissible Purpose Amounts to a Concrete Injury
A California district court held that a consumer had standing to sue based on the defendant’s unauthorized access of his credit report.
Continue reading the summary here.
In Re: Skaggs v. Gooch: Court Sanctions Debt Collection Attorney for Violating Discharge Injunction
This matter is about a bankruptcy discharge violation and whether the defendants who violated the discharge should pay the debtors remedial damages.
Continue reading the summary here.
Collins v. Select Portfolio: Court Dismisses Consumer FDCPA Claims Based on Demand for Extra Itemization
Although the FDCPA does not contain a general duty to itemize detail when communicating to a consumer the total amount of their debt, if a debt collector’s failure to itemize results in the collector misleadingly conveying the amount owed, such conduct may violate the FDCPA.
Continue reading the summary here.
Jan. 26:
Berrian v. Midland Credit Mgmt: Court Grants Summary Judgment on FDCPA Claims
A Pennsylvania district court granted summary judgment in favor of a debt collector, finding the debt collector did not violate any provision of the FDPCA and only engaged in “run-of-the-mill debt collection efforts that do not subject it to tort liability.”
Continue reading the summary here.
Vaughn v. Transit Employees FCU: Consumer’s FCRA Claim Survives Dismissal
A consumer claimed his credit report was riddled with factual inaccuracies. He also claimed a data furnisher did not reasonably investigate his dispute as it did not review the letter that was included in the dispute sent to the data furnisher by the CRA.
Continue reading the summary here.
Green v. Forster & Garbus: State Court Dismisses FDCPA Claims; No Concrete Injury, No Standing
A New York state court found that a consumer’s FDCPA claims, where he only described in broad terms that a collection letter caused him to suffer uncertainty regarding the owner of the debt, did not constitute an injury-in-fact necessary to establish standing to proceed in court. In particular, the consumer admitted he owed the debt, and he did not respond to simple instructions in the letter directing him how to dispute the debt.
Continue reading the summary here.
Jan. 27:
Smith v. Bendett & McHugh: Court Dismisses FDCPA Claims as Lacking Sufficient Detail
Where a consumer raises FDCPA claims related to underlying foreclosure and bankruptcy, the claims are not necessarily barred by the Rooker-Feldman doctrine if the consumer is not challenging the underlying judgment but rather is objecting to related conduct that involves a violation of the FDCPA.
Continue reading the summary here.
Pazymino v. Portfolio Recovery Assocs.: Court Denies Summary Judgment, Question of Fact About Choice of Law Clause in Contract
A consumer alleged that a debt collector violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act by sending her collection letters containing settlement and savings offers in connection with unenforceable debt.
Continue reading the summary here.
Aguilar v. Mandarich Law: Court Finds California RFDCPA Requires a Materiality Showing
A California state appellate court applied the FDCPA’s materiality standard in upholding a lower court’s decision to grant debt collector’s anti-SLAPP motion.
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.
To receive notifications about ACA content—including member alerts, upcoming events and new products—text ALERTS to 96997. Message and data rates may apply. Message frequency will vary. To opt-out at any time, reply STOP to any message we send.
