Nyanjom v. NPAS Solutions: Kansas Court Tosses Letter Vendor Claims

thumbs up


Rejecting Hunstein, the Kansas district court ruled that a consumer lacked standing to bring FDCPA claims consisting of the allegation that a collector violated the FDCPA when it used a letter vendor to prepare a dunning letter. 01/20/2022 3:45 P.M. 4 minute read Nyanjom v. NPAS Solutions, LLC, Defendant., No. 21-CV-1171-JAR-ADM, 2022 WL 168222 (D. […]

Read More…

Martindale v. MegaStar: Transaction Fees May Violate the RFDCPA


A California district court found a consumer sufficiently stated a cause of action under the RFDCPA by alleging that the defendant charged her “convenience fees” to make payments over the phone that were not authorized in the loan agreement or permitted by law. 01/19/2022 3:45 P.M. 3.5 minute read Martindale v. MegaStar Fin. Corp., No. […]

Read More…

Preferred Collection’s Brief in Hunstein Argues Plaintiff Lacks Article III Standing, FDCPA Does Not Prohibit Communications With Agents


The court asked that the parties’ briefs focus on whether Hunstein had Article III standing to bring the FDCPA lawsuit in the letter-vendor case. Preferred Collection has asserted that Hunstein lacks standing because he has no injury in fact and argues that the now-vacated panel opinion ignored common-law agency principles and created a First Amendment […]

Read More…

Preferred Collection Files Brief in Hunstein FDCPA Case

Member Alert


01/18/2022 4:30 P.M. 2 minute read Today, Preferred Collection and Management Services Inc. filed its en banc brief in Hunstein v. Preferred Collection and Management Services Inc. (April 21, 2021). The appeal has become focused, in substantial part, on questions that surround the intersection of the federal judicial doctrine surrounding Article III standing, which relies […]

Read More…