In Grandidier v. Quantum3 Group, LLC, 2014 WL 6908482 (S.D.Ind. 2014), Judge Young found that the FDCPA prohibits filing proofs of claim in bankruptcy court on debts that would be barred by the statute of limitations. The Eleventh Circuit recently decided a case nearly identical to the one before the court. See Crawford v. LVNV Funding, LLC, 758 F.3d 1254 (11th Cir.2014).… Read More
In Bunce v. Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC, 2014 WL 5849252 (D.Kan. 2014), Judge Marten concluded that a creditor’s charge-off of an account did not preclude the debt collector from charging interest. The court concludes that simply because the original creditors charged off the accounts and stopped sending month statements does not preclude the assignee of the accounts from seeking to… Read More
In Chatman v. GC Services, LP, --- F.Supp.3d ----, 2014 WL 5783095 (D.S.C. 2014), Judge Currie found that two voicemail messages left by a debt collector for the debtor violated the FDCPA because they did not meaningfully disclose the callers’ identity. The facts were as follows. Chatman received two very similar voice messages on her cellular telephone in May 2013.… Read More
In Hagler v. Credit World Services, Inc., Judge Hagler found that a debt collector did not violate the FDCPA by leaving a single voicemail message for the debtor. The facts of this case are few and undisputed. Defendant Credit World Services is a debt collector. On June 11, 2013, Bill Jackson, an employee of defendant, called plaintiff and spoke to him… Read More
In Peters v. Financial Recovery Services, Inc., here, Judge Fenner held that although TILA may prohibit a creditor –and hence, it’s debt collector – from charging post-charge-off interest, neither TILA nor the FDCPA prohibit the debt collector from charging state statutory pre-judgment interest after charge-off. Defendant’s final basis for dismissal is that even if GE waived the right to contractual… Read More
In Simpson v. Safeguard Properties, LLC, 2014 WL 4652336 (N.D.Ill. 2014), Judge Gotschall certified the following class under the FDCPA: Beginning in October 2012 and ending in February 2013, at the instruction of Midland, representatives of Safeguard left door hangers on Simpson's door on an approximately monthly basis. ( Id. ¶¶ 18–23.) These door hangers all contained the same text. The front… Read More
In Douglass v. Convergent Outsourcing (3d Cir., Aug. 28, 2014, 13-3588) 2014 WL 4235570, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals found that a debt collector's disclosure of debtor's account number on envelope violated the FDCPA. On May 16, 2011, Plaintiff Courtney Douglass received a debt collection letter from Convergent Outsourcing (“Convergent”) regarding the collection of a debt that Douglass allegedly… Read More
In Patrick v. Pyod, LLC,--- F.Supp.2d ----, 2014 WL 4100414 (S.D.Ind.. 2014), Judge Young held that filing a proof of claim in bankruptcy court on time-barred debt violates the FDCPA. The Eleventh Circuit recently decided a case nearly identical to the one before the court. See Crawfrod v. LVNV Funding, LLC, No. 13–12389, 2014 WL 3361226 (11th Cir. Jul. 10,… Read More
In Russell v. Absolute Collection Services, Inc., --- F.3d ----, 2014 WL 3973792 (4th Cir. 2014), the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit held that a debtor need not first dispute the debt before he can sue under 15 USC 1692e. The Fourth Circuit also held that a debt collector needs to follow up with the creditor if the… Read More
In Crawford v. LVNV Funding, LLC, --- F.3d ----, 2014 WL 3361226 (11th Cir. 2014), when the 11th Circuit sets it put this way, you pretty much know how its coming down. A deluge has swept through U.S. bankruptcy courts of late. Consumer debt buyers—armed with hundreds of delinquent accounts purchased from creditors—are filing proofs of claim on debts deemed unenforceable under… Read More
In Forkum v. Co-Operative Adjustment Bureau, Inc., --- F.Supp.2d ----, 2014 WL 2119922 (N.D.Cal. 2014), Judge Armstong granted summary judgment to an FDCPA plaintiff who alleged that the Debt Collector did not leave the truncated mini-Miranda on a voicemail message that was left in response to the Plaintiff’s own telephone call. The Court finds the following facts undisputed. Plaintiff is… Read More
In Claflin v. Mandarich Law Group, LLP, 2014 WL 688962 (N.D.Cal. 2014), Judge Alsup refused to stay a federal FDCPA claim filed against the debt collector’s lawyers in an underlying state court debt collection lawsuit. The FDCPA plaintiffs argued that the debt collector’s lawyers had improperly filed the state court action in a distant forum in violation of the FDCPA. … Read More
In Hadsell v. CACH, LLC, 2014 WL 497433 (S.D.Cal. 2014), Judge Lorenz, within the context of a motion for reconsideration, granted partial summary judgment and denied partial summary judgment to an FDCPA defendant alleged to have violated a Cease-and-Desist letter from the debtor and to have violated the FDCPA by praying for 10% interest in the Prayer for Relief in… Read More
In Farber v. JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A., 2014 WL 68380 (S.D.Cal. 2013), Judge Curiel found that mortgage servicers were subject to the Rosenthal Act, but found that only certain conduct might be actionable. The facts were as follows: In September 2010, Farber sold the Property by way of a “short sale” with Defendant receiving approximately $1,139,345.00. (Id. ¶ 21.) In… Read More
In Bradley v. Franklin Collection Service, Inc.--- F.3d ----, 2014 WL 23738 (11th Cir. 2014), the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit found that charging a percentage-based collection fee violates the FDCPA unless the instrument creating the obligation allowed it: Section 1692f prohibits unfair or unconscionable means of collection. Subsection (1) of this section specifically prohibits “collection of any amount… Read More
In Caudillo v. Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC, 2013 WL 4102155 (S.D.Cal. 2103), Judge Gonzalez found that a debt collector’s failure to identify the original creditor a state-court debt collection complaint was deceptive. This Court and others have repeatedly held that a debt collection complaint that “fail[s] to identify ... the original creditor, is both deceptive and material under the least… Read More
In Lembach v. Bierman, --- Fed.Appx. ----, 2013 WL 2501752 (4th Cir. 2013), the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals held that allegedly falsely executed foreclosure documents were not actionable under the FDCPA because the documents were accurate, even if improperly executed. The Court of Appeals also held that the general catch-all ‘unfair’ practices provision of the FDCPA did not apply… Read More
In McMahon v. LVNV Funding, LLC, 2012 WL 2597933 (N.D.Ill. 2012), the defendant debt collector was sued in a class action alleging that the debt collector was required to disclose that stale debt was barred by the statute of limitations and the debt collector could not sue on it. Plaintiffs alleged that the FTC had taken the position in an unrelated… Read More
In Scott v. Kelkris Associates, Inc., 2012 WL 996578 (E.D.Cal. 2012), Judge Shubb found that improper service of a state-court debt collection suit did not give rise to a seldom-pleaded Rosenthal Act violation. The Rosenthal Act provides that “[n]o debt collector shall collect or attempt to collect a consumer debt by means of judicial proceedings when the debt collector… Read More
In Adkins v. Weltman, Weinberg & Reis Co., L.P.A., 2012 WL 604249 (S.D.Ohio 2012), the District Court decided not to follow the FTC interpretation of the FDCPA, and found that garnishment of wages was an ‘action’ subject to the FDCPA venue provisions. Section 1692i of title 15 of the United States Code provides in pertinent part: (a) Venue--… Read More
