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.
I have written about this type of case before, but given the volume of new complaints that are being filed, I think it bears mentioning again because it appears that plaintiff’s attorneys and consumers are not going to stop filing these kinds of suits anytime soon.
The Background: With just about all of these types of cases that I am seeing, the sequence of events is the same.
- The plaintiff is contacted by a collection agency for some type of unpaid debt.
- The plaintiff responds by sending a letter to the collection agency, disputing the debt and informing the agency that the only convenient method of contact is via email, and provides an email address.
- The collection agency responds to the dispute letter with a letter of its own.
- The plaintiff files suit, alleging the collection agency, now the defendant, has violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act because it communicated with the plaintiff using a method that was inconvenient to the plaintiff.
The Claim: Generally, the suit alleges the defendant has violated Section 1692c(a)(1) of the FDCPA. Some complaints may include other claims, including Sections 1692e and 1692f. Section 1692c(a)(1) of the FDCPA prohibits collectors from communicating with consumers “at any unusual time or place or a time or place known or which should be known to be inconvenient to the consumer.”
The Last Word: While the volume of claims alleging this type of violation of the FDCPA has not yet reached the volume of Hunstein claims during its heyday, this type of claim is clearly the most popular being filed right now against companies in the accounts receivable management industry. It is definitely something that should be on your radar screen.
