A summary of recent top FCRA, TCPA and FDCPA cases from ACA. Editor’s note: This article is available for members only.
11/12/2021 8:00
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 November 9 – November 12:
November 9
Tolliver v. National Credit: Collector Permitted to Refile Request for Costs
A collector won a summary judgment against a consumer’s FDCPA claims. As the prevailing party, the collector was entitled to recover its costs as a matter of course. The collector was not able to demonstrate the consumer’s claims were frivolous or in bad faith, therefore the collector could not recover fees from the consumer.
Continue reading the summary here.
Edmondson v. Brennan & Clark: Allegations of Emotional Harm Does Not Confer Standing
The consumer purchased a commercial auto insurance policy and fell behind on payments. The consumer and the insurance company dispute whether she intended to buy a consumer policy instead of the commercial policy. The consumer claims the insurance company violated the FDCPA when it attempted to collect the debt. The insurance company claims it is not a debt collector subject to the FDCPA and moved to have the case dismissed.
Continue reading the summary here.
Brewer v. Blum & Associates: No Injury-In-Fact from Partially Visible Account Number
The court held that the alleged risk of harm stemming from an account number that was partially visible through a glassine window on an envelope did not amount to an injury in fact.
Continue reading the summary here.
November 10
Johansen v. Bluegreen Vacations Unlimited: Court Denies Class Certification for TCPA Claim
The consumer received telemarketing phone calls despite the fact that his phone number was on the National Do Not Call Registry. The consumer moved to certify the class and himself as the class representative.
Continue reading the summary here.
Hunsinger v. Alpha Cash Buyers: Dialer Must Use Random or Sequential Number Generator to be an ATDS
Citing the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Facebook v. Duguid, a Texas district court found the plaintiff’s TCPA claim must be dismissed because he failed to adequately allege that the defendant’s text messages were sent using a random or sequential number generator.
Continue reading the summary here.
Hunstein v. Preferred Collection: 11th Circuit Addresses, Affirms Its Earlier Decision
The 11th Circuit declined to revise its earlier holding and sua sponte affirmed its decision holding that supplying debtor information to a third-party mail vendor constituted a communication “in connection with the collection of any debt” within the meaning of Section 1692c(b) and so violated the FDCPA prohibitions on “communicating” information about a debt to third parties.
Continue reading the summary here.
November 11
Saxerud v. T-H Professional & Medical Collections: De Minimus Award of Damages Does not Preclude Award of Attorneys’ Fees
The consumer won her case on a technical violation of the FDCPA but was awarded no actual damages and $200 in statutory damages. The consumer sued for the full amount of the attorneys’ fees and costs. The debt collector claimed that due to the de minimus nature of the award, the consumer was not entitled to attorney’s fees.
Continue reading the summary here.
Elysayed v. National Credit Systems: Allegation of 19 Calls, Without More, Did Not Violate FDCPA
An Ohio district court granted a debt collector’s motion for summary judgment, finding that an allegation of 19 calls over a one-year period without any evidence that the calls were intended to annoy, abuse or harass the consumer did not violate the FDCPA.
Continue reading the summary here.
Dubeck v. Marion Law: Settled or Summary Judgment?
The court in an FDCPA action denied a consumer’s motion to set aside its entry of summary judgment, finding that the parties had not reached a binding settlement agreement.
Continue reading the summary here.
November 12
El-Shawary v. US Bank: Court Finds Defendant Not a Debt Collector
The court found a defendant was not a debt collector for the purposes of the FDCPA when the defendant began servicing a consumer’s loan several years before the consumer defaulted on their loan. Accordingly, the “not in default” statutory exception to the definition of a debt collector applied.
Continue reading the summary here.
Redman v. Javitch Block: Debt Collector Waived Right to Remove Case to Federal Court
The consumer brought an FDCPA action in state court and the debt collector filed a motion to dismiss the claims. The judge who received the motion recused himself and the case was assigned to the judge who presided over the previous litigation leading up to the case in state court.
Continue reading the summary here.
Mekela v. Experian: Reporting Charge-Offs on a Recurring Basis did not Violate the FCRA
An Oregon district court found the defendants’ recurring reporting of the consumer’s accounts as charge-offs was not incorrect or misleading.
Continue reading the summary here.
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.
Interested in advertising on our brand-new website? Contact Tima Good at The YGS Group at (717) 430-2282 or [email protected].
Follow ACA International on Twitter @ACAIntl and @acacollector, Facebook and request to join our LinkedIn group for news and event updates. ACA International members are welcome to submit news items for possible publication to [email protected].