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
Call … The post Class Action Accuses Collector of Using Inaccurate Name of OriginalCreditor first appeared on AccountsRecovery.net. The post Class Action Accuses Collector of Using Inaccurate Name of OriginalCreditor appeared first on AccountsRecovery.net. Want to learn more?
In this case, a collection operation is facing a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act class-action lawsuit because it provided website addresses to two different payment portals — one for the originalcreditor and one for its own portal — in separate collection letters that were sent to the plaintiff.
The background: The plaintiff claimed that the defendant attempted to collect a debt that it had purchased from the originalcreditor. The debt was then transferred to the defendant for collection.
This change directly impacts originalcreditors who previously may not have considered themselves subject to these regulations. Why it matters: The proposed rules reinforce that all persons or entities attempting to collect debts, including those collecting on their own accounts, fall within the scope of regulation.
These regulations could fundamentally alter how creditors and debt collectors operate, potentially harming consumers while imposing onerous compliance burdens on financial institutions. Critics fear these changes could lead to unintended consequences, such as increased litigation, reduced access to credit, and consumer confusion.
The judge determined that it followed its procedures for investigating disputes, which included contacting the originalcreditor to confirm the debts validity. Thus, the court concluded that NCSs investigation was not unreasonable as a matter of law. Learn more.
The background: The dispute stemmed from a credit card account the plaintiff opened in 2016 with the originalcreditor. According to the plaintiff, the account terms were established during a phone call with a representative, who promised a zero-percent interest rate for the life of the loan and no fees beyond the principal.
The plaintiff also lodged complaints with both the Better Business Bureau and the state dental board, arguing that the originalcreditor had engaged in illegal double billing. The claims: The defendant is accused of violating sections 1692d, 1692e, 1692f, and 1692g of the FDCPA, relating to unfair and deceptive practices.
A District Court judge in Oklahoma has granted a defendant’s motion to dismiss a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act case, ruling the defendant did not violate the statute because it failed to notify the originalcreditor that the debt had been disputed by the plaintiff.
Winning a collection lawsuit because the judge ruled there was not a sufficient chain of custody to prove the account was transferred by the originalcreditor to the entity purchasing the account is not enough evidence that a juror could use to conclude a false statement was made, ruled a District Court judge in Pennsylvania, … The post Dismissal (..)
Debt collectors are conduits — vessels trying to help originalcreditors recover unpaid debts. Oftentimes, the creditors will make requests or want certain offers included in letters sent to individuals. What happens when a creditor wants to make an offer as a means of trying to get an individual to repay a debt?
A Magistrate Court judge in New York has awarded the attorneys representing a plaintiff in a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act $11,297 in fees, after the plaintiff accepted an offer of judgment in the amount of $1,050 over a $59 debt that was owed to the originalcreditor.
A District Court judge in Illinois has granted a defendant’s motion for summary judgment in a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act case involving how the defendant, and the originalcreditor, came to be in possession of the plaintiff’s husband’s Social Security number. A copy of the ruling in the case of Billups v.
A District Court judge in California has denied a defendant’s motion to compel arbitration in a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act case, ruling that the collection law firm’s actions were independent of the originalcreditor, and thus not subject to the original agreement’s arbitration clause.
Saying that you expended “time, money, and effort” trying to identify what to do when you are confused as to whom the originalcreditor was after receiving a collection letter is not enough for a plaintiff to have standing to sue, ruled a District Court judge in Maryland, who has granted a defendant’s motion to … The post Judge (..)
A District Court judge in Illinois has granted a plaintiff’s motion to remand a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act case back to state court, while denying the motion for attorney fees and costs, after the plaintiff received two collection emails from the defendant in which the name of the originalcreditor was slightly different in … The (..)
A District Court judge in Michigan has granted a defendant’s motion to dismiss after it was sued for allegedly violating the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act by contacting the plaintiff after she had disputed the debt in question with the originalcreditor and for making a “hard inquiry” on her credit report.
Is it possible for an individual to sue a debt collector for violating the Fair Credit Reporting Act and Fair Debt Collection Practices Act for allegedly attempting to collect a debt that the individual believes he did not owe, when the individual took no action against the originalcreditor for placing the allegedly illegitimate debt … The post (..)
JUDGE DENIES MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION IN FDCPA CASE A District Court judge in California has denied a defendant’s motion to compel arbitration in a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act case, ruling that the collection law firm’s actions were independent of the originalcreditor, and thus not subject to the original agreement’s arbitration clause.
A class-action lawsuit has been filed against a collection agency for allegedly violating the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act by having multiple addresses on a collection letter it sent and not explicitly communicating to which address disputes or requests for originalcreditor information should be sent.
The California Court of Appeals has upheld a lower court’s ruling denying a motion to compel arbitration filed by a collection operation, reaching the same conclusion that the plaintiff never officially consented to arbitration with the originalcreditor, and allowing a Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act case to proceed.
CLASS ACTION ACCUSES COLLECTOR OF USING INACCURATE NAME OF ORIGINALCREDITOR A class-action complaint has been filed in federal court in Utah against a collection law firm for allegedly violating the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act with its Model Validation Notice, which was not dated, but also because the debt was allegedly purchased before the (..)
MULTIPLE ‘MISLEADING’ DISPUTES LEADS JUDGE TO GRANT MSJ FOR DEFENDANT IN FCRA, FDCPA CASE After making several attempts to dispute a debt with the originalcreditor, the defendant, and the credit reporting agencies, the plaintiff filed suit, alleging violations of the FCRA and FDCPA.
The California state Senate yesterday passed SB 531, a bill that would require the originalcreditor or owner of a debt to notify a consumer within five days of the sale or assignment of the debt to someone else, while also giving consumers the right to request certain information about a debt from debt collectors, … The post Calif.
COLLECTOR NOT OBLIGATED TO NOTIFY CREDITOR OF DISPUTE A judge in Oklahoma has granted a motion to dismiss, ruling the defendant was not obligated under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act to notify the originalcreditor that a debt was being disputed.
In a case that was defended by the team at Malone Frost Martin, the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit has affirmed a lower court’s ruling in favor of a defendant that was sued for violating the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act because it did not include a copy of the originalcreditor’s financial … The post Appeals Court Affirms (..)
The Court of Appeals for the First Circuit has upheld a lower court’s ruling that the purchaser of a defaulted credit card debt is entitled to the same arbitration opportunity as the originalcreditor, even though the individual who owed the debt prevailed in a civil suit filed by the purchaser because it could not … The post Appeals Court (..)
Although the credit union’s tradeline was updated to reflect that the account was “closed” and in collections, and the collection agency’s tradeline indicated that the credit union was the originalcreditor, both tradelines showed a balance, albeit for different amounts — $18,340 for the credit union and $20,875 for the collection agency.
A District Court judge in California has granted a defendant’s motion to dismiss after it was sued for allegedly violating the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act because it identified the creditor and the originalcreditor in a letter, but did not identify the current creditor to whom the debt was owed, with the judge ruling … The post (..)
A District Court judge in Hawaii has denied a defendant’s motion to compel arbitration in a class-action suit accusing it of violating the Telephone Consumer Protection Act and Fair Debt Collection Practices Act because the defendant did not show that the plaintiff must rely on the terms of his customer agreement with the originalcreditor … (..)
A District Court judge in Illinois has ruled that including references to the “originalcreditor,” a “sender,” and a “current owner of the unpaid account,” is not enough to identify the current creditor to whom a debt is owed and denied a defendant’s motion to dismiss, also ruling that the defendant failed (..)
Over the next decade and a half, he held leadership roles with major originatingcreditors across the U.S. He is the CEO of TrueAccord. His journey in the industry began on the phones as a collector in 1998. and internationally.
When a debt passes from the originalcreditor to a collection agency, this escalation often makes debtors pay attention. There’s an implied threat when an agency gets involved that doesn’t exist with the originalcreditor. These are all benefits not afforded to the originalcreditor.
When a debt passes from the originalcreditor to a collection agency, this escalation often makes debtors pay attention. There’s an implied threat when an agency gets involved that doesn’t exist with the originalcreditor. These are all benefits not afforded to the originalcreditor.
A change in precedent has led the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit to remand a case back to the District Court to determine whether the owners of a debt that was purchased from the originalcreditor can compel arbitration after being sued for allegedly violating the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. A copy […]
A District Court judge in Utah has denied a defendant’s motion to dismiss in a Fair Credit Reporting Act case, ruling that it did not conduct a reasonable investigation after the plaintiff disputed the debt because both the defendant — the originalcreditor — and a collection agency were reporting the debt to the credit […] (..)
The Washington Court of Appeals has overturned a lower court’s ruling in favor of a collection operation that was sued because the originalcreditor — a healthcare provider — did not screen the plaintiff to see if he was eligible for charity care, but there is a lot of back-and-forth between both sides over the […]
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