EDITOR’S NOTE: This article is part of a series that is sponsored by WebRecon. WebRecon identifies serial plaintiffs lurking in your database BEFORE you contact them and expose yourself to a likely lawsuit. Protect your company from as many as one in three new consumer lawsuits by scrubbing your consumers through WebRecon first. Want to learn more? Call (855) WEB-RECON or email admin@webrecon.net today! Thanks to WebRecon for sponsoring this series.
DISCLAIMER: This article is based on a complaint. The defendant has not responded to the complaint to present its side of the case. The claims mentioned are accusations and should be considered as such until and unless proven otherwise.
A lawsuit has been filed against a collection agency, accusing it of violating the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, and Regulation F for allegedly parking the debt without first notifying the plaintiff that it was going to be reported to the credit reporting agencies, for the conduct of its representatives during conversations with the plaintiff, and for illegally adding interest to the amount that was owed. It is also the first complaint I’ve come across where the representative is accused of gaslighting an individual.
A copy of the complaint, filed in District Court for the District of Minnesota, can be accessed via case number 22-cv-2037.
The 47-page complaint goes into great detail recounting conversations between the plaintiff and representatives of the defendant in an attempt to collect a past-due debt related to an apartment rental. The complaint cites no fewer than 16 different provisions of the FDCPA that were allegedly violated, largely surrounding the conduct and behavior of two representatives from the defendant who were attempting to collect from the plaintiff. The representatives are accused of being rude, making false representations, asking invasive questions about the plaintiff’s financial situation, and engaging in a “threatening and unnecessary interrogation.”
One of the representatives was also accused of gaslighting the plaintiff by “telling her to stop raising her voice when Plaintiff was not yelling or being loud, but only trying to finish her sentence before being interrupted” by the representative.
After a number of conversations with the representatives, the plaintiff received a validation notice and disputed the debt, but never received a response from the defendant. The defendant also allegedly ignored a request from the plaintiff to only communicate in writing, and for allegedly attempting to collect on the debt without responding to the dispute request.
Along with the debt parking and FDCPA allegations, the complaint accuses the defendant of violating the FCRA by not conducting a reasonable investigation of the plaintiff’s dispute, after the plaintiff disputed the debt through one of the credit reporting agencies.
