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 collector is facing a class-action lawsuit alleging it violated Regulation F and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act because the items in the validation table of the Model Validation Notice do not add up and are “nonsensical” according to the complaint.
A copy of the complaint, filed in the District Court for the Western District of Tennessee can be accessed using case number 22-cv-02639.
The plaintiff received a Model Validation Notice from the defendant. The notice indicated that the plaintiff owed $6,751.23 based on the itemization date that was used. The notice also indicated that the plaintiff paid or was credited $314 toward the debt. The total amount of the debt, though, was still $6,751.23. The plaintiff is accusing the defendant of not properly crediting a payment and attempting to overcharge the plaintiff while also claiming an incorrect balance owed on the underlying debt.
The complaint accuses the defendant of violation Sections 1692e, 1692e(2), 1692e(10), and 1692g(a)(1) of the FDCPA and is seeking to include anyone who received a similar notice from the defendant where the amount paid or credited to the account was not accounted for in the “Total amount of the debt now” line item of the validation notice.
