A summary of recent top FCRA, TCPA and FDCPA cases from ACA. Editor’s note: This article is available for members only.
7/9/2021 9:00
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 July 7 – July 9:
July 7
Valdes v. Accts. Receivable: Court Grants Bona Fide Error for Attempt to Collect Debt Covered by Worker’s Comp
The consumer sustained a workplace injury and filed a claim for worker’s compensation. Three months later, the debt collector attempted to collect on the consumer’s debt not knowing it was covered under worker’s compensation. The court granted the debt collector a bona fide error defense.
Continue reading the summary here.
Winters v. Emmett: FCRA Plaintiff Lacks Standing; Court Remands Action
A defendant seeking to remain in federal court argues a plaintiff’s complaint creates a reasonable inference that the plaintiff was injured – but the court finds no concrete injury and no Article III standing and so remands the action to state court.
Continue reading the summary here.
Swapna v. Procollect, Inc: Risk of Future Harm Not Enough for Article III Standing
A Tennessee district court found the consumer lacked Article III standing because she only alleged mere procedural violations and the risk of future harm.
Continue reading the summary here.
June 8
Martine v. AFNI: Court Awards Consumer Damages in Default Judgment
The consumer in this case received a dunning letter for a debt she did not owe, and the debt collector defaulted on the judgment. The court awarded the consumer statutory damages and attorney’s fees and costs for the default judgment.
Continue reading the summary here.
Morales v. Healthcare Revenue Recovery Group: Third Circuit Finds Barcode on Envelope Was Concrete Harm
The 3rd Circuit held that the barcode on the envelope’s exterior was “‘a piece of information capable of identifying [the consumer] as a debtor,’” so its disclosure was a concrete harm.
Continue reading the summary here.
Cunningham v. Creative Edge: No Article III Standing, Motion for Default Denied
Texas court again finds TCPA plaintiff lacks standing for claims, following Creasy decision finding TCPA unconstitutional during key period between 2015 and 2020.
Continue reading the summary here.
July 9
Zirpoli v. Midland: Ability to Enforce Arbitration Denied as Loan Purchased Without License
The consumer sued the debt purchaser for credit reporting his debt and pulling his credit report without permissible purpose because, the debt purchaser was not lawfully permitted to purchase the loan. The debt purchaser attempted to compel arbitration. The court found the debt purchaser could not compel arbitration because the contract to purchase debt was void.
Continue reading the summary here.
Sandoval v. Midland Funding, LLC, & Midland Credit Management, Inc.: Court Denies FDCPA Class Certification Request
The court found the two named plaintiffs failed to establish that common issues predominated or that their claims were typical of the proposed class.
Continue reading the summary here.
Michaeli v. Kentfield Rehab: FCRA Action Remanded for Lack of Standing
A California court applies the Ramirez decision and finds general allegations of consumer confusion do not constitute the concrete injury a plaintiff must show to establish Article III standing, and the case was remanded.
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.