Any opinion that starts out by stating “[t]his case is about $82.00” is not likely to go well for one party and in this instance, that was the case for Nestor Saroza. A New Jersey district court recently held that a debt...more
The Sixth Circuit recently made clear its position that “Congress cannot override the baseline requirement[s] of Article III of the U.S. Constitution by labeling the violation of any requirements of a statute a cognizable...more
A recent decision from the North District of Illinois has expanded on the Seventh Circuit’s holding in Pantoja v. Portfolio Recovery Assocs., LLC, 852 F.3d 679 (7th Cir. 2017) regarding revival warnings in collections letters...more
3/1/2018
/ Banking Sector ,
Class Action ,
Class Certification ,
Collection Action ,
Credit Cards ,
FDCPA ,
Financial Services Industry ,
Midland Funding ,
Statute of Limitations ,
Statutory Violations ,
Time-Barred Debt
Settle (verb): “to conclude (a lawsuit) by agreement between parties usually out of court. Merriam Webster Dictionary -
The Third Circuit has refined its position as to whether collection of time-barred debt may violate...more
A recent opinion from a district court in California serves as a reminder to creditors and debt collectors of the limited circumstances upon which convenience fees can be collected. ...more
Any opinion that starts out by stating “[t]his case is about $82.00” is not likely to go well for one party and in this instance, that was the case for Nestor Saroza. ...more
The Tenth Circuit has weighed in on whether a non-judicial foreclosure is debt collection activity. In doing so, the Tenth Circuit has joined a split in the circuits on the issue. With the Tenth Circuit’s decision the...more
Any opinion that starts out by stating “[t]his case is about $82.00” is not likely to go well for one party and in this instance, that was the case for Nestor Saroza....more
When does the statute of limitations begin to run for a letter that runs afoul of the FDCPA? That is the issue which was presented in a recent case before the Eastern District of New York. In Gil v. Allied Interstate, LLC,...more
An unpublished opinion from the Eleventh Circuit continues its analysis of the definition of a debt collector and continues to narrow the applicability of the FDCPA. As many may recall, the Eleventh Circuit’s opinion in...more
The Seventh Circuit has held that a voice mail message left for a consumer is a “communication” under the FDCPA. In Hart v. Credit Control, LLC, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 18375 (11th Cir. Sept, 22, 2017), the debt collector left...more
Mortgage servicers need to carefully review their Transfer Notices when the debt is in default at the time of transfer. In an unpublished decision, the Eastern District of New York recently held that a “Notice of Servicing...more
7/12/2017
/ Banking Sector ,
Debt Collection ,
Disclosure Requirements ,
FDCPA ,
Financial Services Industry ,
Interest Rates ,
Mortgage Servicers ,
Mortgages ,
Motion to Dismiss ,
Principal Balance ,
Transfer of Interest
The Fourth Circuit recently examined the issue of Article III standing in the context of the FDCPA. In Ben-Davies v. Blibaum & Associates, P.A., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 9667 (4th Cir. June 1, 2017), the consumer sought to...more
6/7/2017
/ Article III ,
Consumer Financial Products ,
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Debt Buyers ,
Debt Collection ,
Debt Collectors ,
FDCPA ,
Federal Rule 12(b)(1) ,
Financial Services Industry ,
Injury-in-Fact ,
Standing ,
Third-Party Service Provider
Midland Funding, LLC v. Johnson, (May 15, 2017).
Yesterday, the Supreme Court reversed the Eleventh Circuit’s holding in Midland Funding v. Johnson in a 5-3 split. Their decision resolves a circuit split as to whether...more
A New York District Court recently tackled the intersection between bankruptcy and pre-petition FDCPA claims and the application of judicial estoppel to undisclosed claims. In December 2013, Jeziorowski filed a complaint...more
A recent decision from a Louisiana district court should provide some comfort to banks and other financial institutions who acquire other entities by merger – at least in the Fifth Circuit, they are not debt collectors. ...more
An Illinois district court has taken a broad view of standing under section 1692e of the FDCPA. In Koval v. Harris & Harris, Ltd., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53124 (N.D. Ill. Apr. 5, 2017), a demand letter addressed to Michael...more
A summons which stated the consumer had thirty days to answer a debt collection suit did not violate the FDCPA when the state rules of civil procedure only provided for twenty days. In Bryant v. Kass Shuler, P.A., the...more
A consumer who sued a debt collector over an inaccurate statement as to the amount of a settlement offer recently saw his complaint dismissed for lack of standing. In Allgire v. HOVG, LLC, the plaintiff was contacted...more
A summons which stated the consumer had thirty days to answer a debt collection suit did not violate the FDCPA when the state rules of civil procedure only provided for twenty days. In Bryant v. Kass Shuler, P.A., the...more
A recent district court opinion from Michigan makes clear that statutory violations of the FDCPA do not absolve a plaintiff from the need to show a concrete injury in order to establish Article III standing. In Johnston v....more
A district court out of Missouri has served up a reminder as to the limitations of a motion to dismiss based upon subject matter jurisdiction. In May v. Consumer Adjustment Co., the consumer filed an FDCPA complaint is state...more
2/13/2017
/ Article III ,
Debt Collection ,
Demand Letter ,
FDCPA ,
Financial Institutions ,
Financial Services Industry ,
Injury-in-Fact ,
Motion to Dismiss ,
Spokeo v Robins ,
Standing ,
Subject Matter Jurisdiction
A demand letter sent by a debt collector was not doomed by an incorrect statement of the creditor’s name. In Santibanez v. National Credit Systems, Inc., the debt collector’s initial letter stated as follows...more
A New York District Court recently addressed the issue of whether the FDCPA requires passive debt buyers to personally register disputes or whether they can delegate that obligation to their third party debt...more
A decision from a New Jersey district court serves as a reminder that call volume alone will not support a violation of the FDCPA. In Chisholm v. Afni, Inc., the issue before the court was “whether a series of 18 telephone...more