Seventh Circuit rules Disclosure of Personal Information to Vendor is not an Injury
CFPB Advisory Opinion on Time-barred Debt Collection - The Consumer Finance Podcast
CFPB's Policy Statement on Abusiveness (Part 2) - The Consumer Finance Podcast
Recent Trends in Article III Standing - The Consumer Finance Podcast
2022 Year in Review and Look Ahead Crossover With FCRA Focus - The Consumer Finance Podcast
2022 Year in Review and Look Ahead Crossover With The Consumer Finance Podcast - FCRA Focus
Connecticut Collections: How to get paid if you are owed money? Part 1: Pre and Post-Judgement Collection Specifics
Can My Creditors Put me In Jail?
20 Things a Debt Collector Can't Do
5 Reasons Consumers Should File an FDCPA Lawsuit
The TCPA: Basics, Targeted Industries, and Trends
Bill on Bankruptcy: Detroit Shows Need for Amending Bankruptcy Law
Welcome to the Major US Supreme Court and Appellate Cases chapter of our annual report Consumer Financial Services 2023 Year in Review. Looking Ahead to 2024 - The Supreme Court continues to take a close look at major...more
This month, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) started the new year by filing an amicus brief in an ongoing appeal in the First Circuit focusing on an interpretation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act...more
On September 8, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit issued an order in Hunstein v. Preferred Collection and Management Services, Inc. dismissing the case after determining that plaintiff failed to allege a...more
The Seventh Circuit rejected emotional distress and other intangible injuries as a basis for Article III standing in a class action seeking statutory damages under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). In Pierre v....more
In Woods v. LVNV Funding, LLC, — F. 4th — (2022), the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of FDCPA and FCRA claims based upon the defendants’ collection and reporting of a fraudulently opened account....more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit issued its initial opinion on Hunstein v. Preferred Collection and Management Services, Inc., No. 8:19-cv-00983-TPB-TGW on April 21, 2021. As previously discussed in a...more
On November 17, a majority of the active judges of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit issued an order sua sponte to rehear Hunstein v. Preferred Collection and Management Services, Inc., en banc. The order...more
On June 14, 2021, the US Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit issued an order withholding issuance of the mandate for its April 21, 2021, holding in Hunstein v. Preferred Collection and Management Services, Inc. In Hunstein,...more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently held that a debt collector’s settlement offer must indicate whether interest and fees are continuing to accrue on the outstanding debt, or alternatively, whether...more
On May 14, 2021, the Seventh Circuit United States Court of Appeals issued a decision reaffirming the rule from “a slew of cases” that, without injury, a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) claim alleging a bare...more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently upheld a lower court’s decision in Hunstein v. Preferred Collection and Management Services, Inc., 994 F.3d 1341 (11th. Cir. 2021). They affirmed that a debt...more
As litigation funding becomes more commonplace, courts are having to determine how a wide variety of laws apply to litigation funding agreements. Until now, courts have primarily focused on two issues: 1) whether or when...more
Court Rules that Debt Collector Violated FDCPA with Communication to Dunning Vendor - A federal appellate court has recently ruled that a debt collector violated certain privacy requirements under the federal Fair Debt...more
In a first-of-its-kind ruling, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit may have upended the long-standing and rather routine business practice of financial services companies using third-party vendors to manage,...more
A recent federal appeals decision is sending shockwaves throughout the financial services sector. In Hunstein v. Preferred Collection & Mgmt. Services, Inc., the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit held that, under the...more
On April 21, 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit issued a decision that threatens significant consequences for a variety of loan servicing and debt collection industries. The upshot of the court’s holding...more
The Fifth Circuit’s decision in Fontana v. Bay Area Credit Services, No. 20-30471 (5th Cir. 2021) sets another important limitation on the scope of covered “communications” under the FDCPA. In this case, Bay Area Credit...more
The Sixth Circuit recently weighed in on whether there is a “benign language” exception to Section 1692f(8) of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (the “FDCPA”). In Donovan v. FirstCredit, Inc., No. 20-3485, 2020 U.S....more
Three Important Ways the COVID-19 Pandemic is Changing the Delivery of Consumer Financial Services - The world continues to come to grips with the daily changes brought by the COVID-19 pandemic. Schools contemplate...more
Consumer Law Hinsights is a monthly compilation of nationwide consumer protection cases of interest to financial services and accounts receivable management companies, brought to you by Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP....more
Welcome to Consumer Law Hinsights?a monthly compilation of nationwide consumer protection cases of interest to financial services and accounts receivable management companies. This edition highlights our interactive COVID-19...more
Barr v. American Association of Political Consultants, Inc., Case No. 19–631 (2020). The federal government cannot exempt itself from the anti-robocall provisions of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991, 47 U. S. C....more
Consumer Law Hinsights is a monthly compilation of nationwide consumer protection cases of interest to financial services and accounts receivable management companies....more
The Third Circuit Court of Appeals issued an en banc decision in Riccio v. Sentry Credit, overturning Graziano v. Harrison, after finding that there is no written dispute requirement in Section 1692g(a)(3) of the Fair Debt...more