A District Court judge in New York has granted a defendant’s motion to dismiss after it was sued for allegedly violating the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act by sending a letter that referenced a “current balance,” even though the balance could not increase.
Similar to what he did in another case against the same defendant, Judge Brian Cogan of the District Court for the Eastern District of New York called this case a “lawyer’s case,” conceived by a “sophisticated lawyer, not the least sophisticated consumer.”
A copy of the ruling, in Donaeva v. Client Services, Inc., can be accessed by clicking here.
The plaintiff received a collection letter, which included the following information:
Balance Due At Charge-off: 4,725.16
Interest: 0.00
Other Charges: 0.00
Payments Made: 0.00
Current Balance: 4,725.16
The plaintiff filed suit, alleging the letter violated Section 1692e of the FDCPA by mis-representing the amount of the debt that was owed. Because no interest was accruing on the account and no other charges could be levied, the balance was never going to change. But the plaintiff charged that by using the word “current,” the letter indicated the balance could change at some point in the future.
But seeking ambiguity where it does not exist was not enough for Judge Cogan to let the case continue.
“Indeed, a lawyer in search of ambiguity is even more likely than a consumer in search of ambiguity to find fault with this entirely accurate and innocuous debt collection letter that does not resemble the kind of debt collection abuses that inspired the FDCPA,” he wrote.
