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 frequent comment made during webinars by panelists is that if you are going to attempt to communicate with a consumer via a certain channel, you should be prepared to receive communications from consumers in that channel, and to respond in kind. A collector is facing a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act case because it allegedly sent a text message to a consumer, who responded with a refusal to pay the debt, but then replied back with an automated message that the consumer had to call another number for help.
A copy of the complaint, filed in the District Court for the Southern District of Alabama, can be accessed using case number 23-cv-00275 or by clicking here.
Back on May 25, the plaintiff received a text message from the defendant attempting to collect on a debt. The next day, the plaintiff allegedly replied back to the text message, saying “I refuse to pay the debt” according to the complaint. Nonetheless, the defendant allegedly sent another text message attempting to collect on the debt and also sent a message saying “… a debt collector does not monitor this telephone number” and providing a phone number that could be called, along with another text message with the URL for a website that could be used for “self service options.”
Receiving the additional text messages caused the plaintiff to suffer actual damages in the form of anger, anxiety, decreased ability to focus on tasks while at work, frustration, amongst other negative emotions, as well as damages to her FICO scores, according to the complaint.
The complaint accuses the defendant of violation Section 1692c(c) of the FDCPA and seeks actual damages and statutory damages under the statute.
