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
A District Court judge in Florida has granted a plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment in a FairDebtCollection Practices Act case, ruling that a collectionlawfirm used an invalid garnishment order to collect on the subject debt. The decision, issued by Judge William F.
The Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit has affirmed a lower court’s ruling in favor of a plaintiff who accused a collectionlawfirm of violating the FairDebtCollection Practices Act by obtaining a writ of garnishment in the wrong jurisdiction.
First, they allegedly misrepresented themselves as attorneys or members of a lawfirm. Second, the FTC claims they violated the FairDebtCollection Practices Act by failing to disclose that they were acting as debt collectors and by making threats arrest, property liens, and wage garnishment that they could not legally enforce.
APPEALS COURT UPHOLDS RULING FOR PLAINTIFF IN FDCPA CASE OVER GARNISHMENT JURISDICTION The Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit has affirmed a lower court’s ruling in favor of a plaintiff who accused a collectionlawfirm of violating the FairDebtCollection Practices Act by obtaining a writ of garnishment in the wrong jurisdiction.
A District Court judge in Arizona has granted a defendant’s motion for summary judgment in a FairDebtCollection Practices Act case, ruling that it is entitled to the statute’s bona fide error defense after garnishing a bank account where Social Security payments were deposited to satisfy a judgment.
A District Court judge in Arizona has granted a defendant’s motion for summary judgment in a FairDebtCollection Practices Act case, ruling that it is entitled to the statute’s bona fide error defense after garnishing a bank account where Social Security payments were deposited to satisfy a judgment.
Judge Dismisses Remaining FDCPA Claim in BK Case A District Court judge in Illinois has dismissed the remaining claim in a FairDebtCollection Practices Act case against a defendant, citing a lack of subject matter jurisdiction because the plaintiff lacked standing to sue. Read on to hear what the experts have to say this week.
That said, let me walk you through all the elements of this particular email that tip it off as a scam: From: Sherrill Green <SherrillGreen@outlook.com> Wait, the prestigious “Webster LawFirm” doesn’t have it’s own domain and you’re using a generic outlook.com account? Attorney at Law?
Debt collectors are notorious for harassing consumers when they seek repayment, calling excessively and threatening to take actions that may not be legal. What you may not know is that you are protected by the FairDebtCollection Practices Act (FDCPA), a law designed to keep third-party debt collectors in check when they contact you.
The Eleventh Circuit recently joined the First and Eighth Circuits in concluding that the FDCPA’s venue provision does not apply to post-judgment garnishment proceedings. Post judgment, the lawfirm filed a garnishment proceeding against the consumer’s bank seeking to collect on the judgment. 1692i(a)(2).
The Rodenburg LawFirm (Rodenburg), whose primary business is debtcollection, held a Commercial Umbrella Liability Policy with The Cincinnati Insurance Company (Cincinnati Insurance) that obligated Cincinnati Insurance to indemnify Rodenburg for liability to third parties for certain defined injuries.
Rodenburg LawFirm is available at: Link to Opinion. In Minnesota, a creditor may issue a garnishment summons to any third party “at any time after entry of a money judgment in [a] civil action.” The Eighth Circuit found that Creditor’s mailing of the garnishment summons on Debtor caused him no tangible injury.
Civil Complaint Administration, Pacific Billing Solutions, Cornerstone Legal Group, LLC, and their operators engaged in a fraudulent scheme to deceive consumers into paying debts they did not owe. These letters threatened legal action, damage to credit scores, and other severe consequences if the purported debts were not paid.
If you’re hearing from this Norfolk, Virginia-based collection agency, you owe the agency money, and it has a strong incentive to collect on your debt. When you hear from Portfolio Recovery (or any other debt collector), let the agency know that you know your rights. Make Them Prove the Debt is Yours.
In early 2019, a garnishment action was filed by Pallida in Denton County, Texas to collect on the default judgment. In early 2011, a default judgment was obtained against Barboza. Barboza), thus 1692i(a) did not apply. The court’s analysis relied heavily on an Idaho district court decision, Cole v.
In early 2019, a garnishment action was filed by Pallida in Denton County, Texas to collect on the default judgment. In early 2011, a default judgment was obtained against Barboza. Barboza), thus 1692i(a) did not apply. The court’s analysis relied heavily on an Idaho district court decision, Cole v.
When you work with a debtcollection attorney, the majority of funds collected still end up back in your ledger. 5: Debt Collectors Hound Debtors and Make Threats. Debtcollection is governed by the FairDebtCollection Practices Act , which has specific guidelines for contacting debtors.
Governments and regulatory bodies continually strive to strike a balance between consumer protection and enabling efficient debt recovery. New regulations, such as the implementation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) in the United States, aim to ensure fairdebtcollection practices and enhance consumer rights.
Attorneys who regularly engage in collection work for community associations have increasingly become targets for lawsuits filed by professional consumer attorneys under the FairDebtCollection Practices Act (“FDCPA” or “the Act”), 15 U.S.C. and analogous state laws. Affinity Management LLC , 849 F.3d 5 (9th Cir.
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