Sometimes, the legal system appears to make things harder than they need to be. Case in point — a Magistrate Court judge in Colorado has granted a motion to dismiss a Fair Credit Reporting Act and Fair Debt Collection Practices Act suit against a collection operation on all counts but one on the grounds that the evidence from the defendant that would exonerate it on the remaining count is inadmissible at this point in the proceedings.
The Background: The plaintiff verbally disputed a debt with the defendant and then sent in two written disputes three and 13 days after the verbal dispute was made. The plaintiff claims the defendant failed to validate the debts and that the defendant made false or factually incorrect statements to the credit reporting agencies.
The Evidence: The defendant provided four documents to the judge in arguing why the case should be dismissed — the initial notice it sent to the plaintiff, the two written disputes it received from the plaintiff, and the validation response letter it sent back. But Judge Kathryn A. Starnella of the District Court for the District of Colorado said none of those documents could be introduced at this point of the case because the plaintiff did not reference them in his complaint.
The Ruling: Judge Starnella dismissed the claims that the defendant violated the FCRA and that it violated Sections 1692c, 1692e, 1692f, and 1692g — related to the verbal dispute only — of the FDCPA. But as for the claim that it violated Section 1692g of the FDCPA for the written disputes that were submitted, Judge Starnella denied the motion to dismiss because the defendants did not show the plaintiff failed to state a claim — that the dispute was not validated — for which relief could be granted.
