CFPB files amicus brief in Ninth Circuit FDCPA case


The CFPB, together with the FTC, has filed an amicus brief in Hernandez v. Williams, Zinman & Parham, P.C., a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act case on appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

The case involves the FDCPA requirement in 15 U.S.C. §1692g(a) for “a debt collector” to send a validation notice either in “the initial communication” or “[w]ithin five days after the initial communication with a consumer in connection with the collection of any debt.” The issue before the Ninth Circuit is whether the requirement only applies to the first debt collector that contacts a consumer to collect a particular debt or to each debt collector that contacts the consumer to collect that debt.

The plaintiff in the case claimed that the letter she received from the defendant containing the validation notice violated the FDCPA because the notice did not include all required information. The defendant argued that it was not subject to the FDCPA validation notice requirement because its letter was not the “initial communication” the plaintiff received about the debt. According to the defendant, because the debtor had previously received a validation notice complying with the FDCPA from another debt collector, the defendant was a subsequent debt collector that had no obligation to comply with the validation notice requirement. 

The district court granted summary judgment to the defendant, concluding that the validation notice requirement did not apply to the defendant’s letter because it was not the initial communication that the plaintiff had received about the debt. According to the district court, the FDCPA’s plain text contemplated only one initial communication with a debtor on a given debt, meaning the initial communication from the initial debt collector.

In its amicus brief in support of a reversal of the district court’s decision, the CFPB argues that each debt collector that contacts a consumer — not just the first debt collector that attempts to collect a particular debt — must send a validation notice that complies with the FDCPA. According to the CFPB, §1692g(a) can naturally be read to apply to the initial communication of any debt collector, initial or subsequent, that contacts a consumer about a debt.

The CFPB also argues that for §1692g(a) to serve its purpose, which was to eliminate the problem of debt collectors attempting to collect the wrong amounts from the wrong consumers, it must apply to both initial and subsequent debt collectors. Finally, the CFPB asserts that to the extent there is any ambiguity in §1692g(a), the court should defer to the views of the CFPB and FTC (which shares concurrent enforcement authority with the CFPB).

Written by:

Published In:


DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Ballard Spahr LLP | Attorney Advertising

Don't miss a thing! Build a custom news brief:

Read fresh new writing on compliance, cybersecurity, Dodd-Frank, whistleblowers, social media, hiring & firing, patent reform, the NLRB, Obamacare, the SEC…

…or whatever matters the most to you. Follow authors, firms, and topics on JD Supra.

Create your news brief now - it's free and easy »

All the intelligence you need, in one easy email:

Great! Your first step to building an email digest of JD Supra authors and topics. Log in with LinkedIn so we can start sending your digest...

Sign up for your custom alerts now, using LinkedIn ›

* With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name.