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 collection operation is facing a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act lawsuit from a consumer who received a number of text messages from the defendant but allegedly failed to identify itself as a collector, failed to provide the requested verification of the debt, and engaged in actions that were intended to “unjustly condemn and vilify” the plaintiff for her non-payment of the debt.
A copy of the complaint, filed in the District Court for the Western District of Missouri, can be accessed using case number 23-cv-04177 or by clicking here.
The plaintiff included five screenshots that purportedly represent the conversations that she was having with a representative (or representatives) of the defendant via text messaging. After introducing itself and informing the plaintiff that it had been trying to reach her to discuss an “account in our office,” the first text message asked the plaintiff to contact the defendant at the number that was used to send the text.
After the plaintiff informed the defendant that she would not be able to make any payments until she received a refund and asked for a number to call the defendant, the defendant allegedly responded, “The account has been delinquent for too long to refuse to discuss options. It is not harrassment [sic] to try to contact someone regarding a bill they haven’t paid in 2 years. We will advise our client of your refusal to discuss the account appropriately.”
The screenshots don’t seem to capture all of the interactions between the plaintiff and the defendant. For example, one screenshot ends with the plaintiff messaging, “What is this about?” and “Does this place accept text?” and the next screenshot starts with a message from the defendant that says, “We’ve already send [sic] all of that and due to your severe delinquency the account must be discussed. Unfortunately, that is what has to happen when account is in default for this long”.
The complaint accuses the collector of violating Sections 1692d, 1692d(6), 1692e, 1692e(10), 1692e(11), 1692f, 1692g(a)(3), and 1692g(b) of the FDCPA.
