A plaintiff has filed a pair of class-action lawsuits against two collection agencies and Bank of America, alleging that one of the agencies and BofA violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act and the other agency violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.
The agency accused of violating the FDCPA did so by including from its client, JP Morgan Chase. The language at the bottom of the collection letter stated: If we settle this debt with you for less than the full outstanding balance, Chase may offer you less favorable terms in the future for some Chase products or services, or may deny your application.
The language was included on two collection letters received by the plaintiff, Neal Preston. The agency, MRS BPO, is accused of violating Section 1692(e) by allegedly making false or deceptive comments to the plaintiff that could be mis-interpreted by the least sophisticated consumer.
Even the placement of the language in the letter — below a perforated fold — was cited as being “problematic.” Given that the language was included below two required disclosures mandated by the FDCPA, the language could also be seen as a required disclosure, the plaintiff alleged in his complaint.
A copy of the complaint can be accessed here. From the complaint:
This language was intended to give debtors like Plaintiff a confusing, Hobson’s Choice of sorts – save money and settle the debt for less than the amount owed, but suffer some unspecified action at the hands of Chase.
In his other suit, Preston is claiming that Mercantile Adjustment Bureau and Bank of America contacted his cell phone after he had revoked consent and using am automated telephone dialing system (ATDS) or autodialer.
A copy of the complaint can be accessed here.
