This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
The Florida Supreme Court has affirmed a lower court’s ruling holding that an individual subjected to debt collection activities for an injury covered by workers’ compensation can sue under the Florida ConsumerCollection Practices Act instead of the state’s Department of FinancialServices holding jurisdiction.
The Connecticut Department of Banking has revoked the consumercollection agency license and imposed a fine of $100,000 on a collection agency for failing to provide information requested during an examination, which rendered the state unable to determine the financial responsibility and general fitness of the operation that it could operate soundly (..)
THE COMPLIANCE DIGEST IS SPONSORED BY: Florida Appeals Court Upholds Dismissal in FCCPA Case Over Claims Assignability A Florida Appeals Court has upheld the dismissal of a case that hinged on whether claims filed under the Florida ConsumerCollections Practices Act (FCCPA) were assignable to third parties.
On July 1, the Connecticut Department of Banking issued an “Order Establishing Requirements for Conducting Business from a Remote Office Location,” allowing individuals working for consumercollection agencies, debt adjusters, debt negotiators, mortgage brokers, mortgage services, sales finance companies, small loan companies, and student loan servicers (..)
Businesses throughout Florida should be aware of consumer statutes that provide remedies to consumers and impose liability to businesses, even for small technical violations. Florida ConsumerCollection Practices Act (FCCPA). Florida’s ConsumerCollection Practices Act (FCCPA) Part 1: Understanding the FCCPA.
The Bureau educates, establishes and enforces rules, and has a compliance arm addressing debt collection as it relates to consumercollections. In New York State, it’s the Department of FinancialServices. The CFPB regulates debt collection only as it relates to consumer debt.
The Florida ConsumerCollection Practices Act (FCCPA) is a pro-consumer statute. Unlike the FDCPA, which only applies to debt collectors, the FCCPA applies to all persons or businesses collectingconsumer debts.
The Florida ConsumerCollection Practices Act (FCCPA) and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) are two pro-consumer statutes. Oftentimes, consumer lawyers bring claims for technical violations of the statutes, even when there are not any actual damages suffered by a consumer. Hamilton, Esq.
The Florida ConsumerCollection Practices Act (FCCPA) and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) are two pro-consumer statutes. Oftentimes, consumer lawyers bring claims for technical violations of the statutes, even when there are not any real damages suffered by a consumer. Hamilton, Esq.
The Florida ConsumerCollection Practices Act (FCCPA) is a pro-consumer statute. 17) relating to emails for collecting debt. As such, businesses need to be aware of the statute and the risk and liability of the statute. 17) or whether courts broadly interpret the statute to include emails.
At Burr & Forman, Simms-Petredis serves as a Partner in the firm’s FinancialServices group with a focus on financial litigation and compliance. “HCBA has had such an impact on me and my career, and it is my pleasure to continue giving back in any way that I can.”.
The Florida ConsumerCollection Practices Act (FCCPA) is a pro-consumer statute. Given the pro-consumer nature of the statute, one big consideration for defending against FCCPA claims is how to shift risk to the plaintiff. . As such, businesses need to be aware of the statute and the risk and liability of the statute.
The Commissioner alleged in the order that the firm had acted as a consumercollection agency in Connecticut without a consumercollection agency license, in violation of § 36a-801(a) of the Connecticut General Statutes. The firm had 14 days to request a hearing, but failed to do so.
The Florida ConsumerCollection Practices Act (FCCPA) and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) are two pro-consumer statutes. is board certified in business litigation by the Florida Bar and practices in the firm’s banking and financialservices industry team. About the Author: Austin T.
Nevertheless, there appears to be an increase in class action complaints alleging violations of consumer protection laws such as Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), Florida’s ConsumerCollections Practices Act (FCCPA), Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), or Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA).
Commonwealth Financial Systems is a nonbank corporation with its principal place of business in Dickson City, Pennsylvania. Commonwealth is a third-party debt collector that specializes in the collection of past-due medical debts and furnishes information about consumercollection accounts to consumer reporting companies.
After receiving notice of representation, the defendant sent five billing notifications to the plaintiff and made six telephone calls attempting to collect on the $5 monthly payment. The plaintiff filed suit against the defendant alleging, among other things, violation of § 559.72(18)
Collection agencies should be mindful of this clarification and should begin reviewing their policies, procedures and scripts to evaluate whether they are sufficiently robust to adequately identify such parties.
On July 15, the Connecticut Department of Banking fined a collection agency, after finding it had allegedly operated without proper licensing for about seven years. The collection agency filed an application through the Nationwide Multistate Licensing System and Registry with the state to act as a consumercollection agency in Connecticut.
The agency, which surrendered its license to collect in Connecticut in 2018, was found to have continued to operate in the state until it re-filed an application last year to act as a consumercollection agency. For more information, click here.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 19,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content