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 original creditor information should be sent.
A copy of the complaint in the case of Eady v. United Collection Bureau can be accessed by clicking here.
The plaintiff received a collection letter from the defendant, in relation to a defaulted retail credit debt. The letter included the name of the defendant and an address in the top-left corner, and two other addresses, both of which were on the payment coupon at the bottom of the letter. The letter also included the statutory language for disclosing to the individual that he had 30 days notify “this office” to dispute the validity of the debt.
The problem, at least for the plaintiff, was that he did not know to which address to send a dispute. While the complaint points out that the plaintiff “expended time and money in determining the proper course of action” it does not mention what that course of action was. The plaintiff “would have pursued a different course of action were it not for Defendant’s statutory violations,” according to the complaint.
The defendant is accused of violating Sections 1692e, 1692f, and 1692g of the FDCPA. The plaintiff seeks to include anyone else who received a similar letter from the defendant without being told to which address disputes should be sent to.
