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 law firm is facing a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act class-action lawsuit for failing to identify the original creditor in a Model Validation Notice while also allegedly failing to inform the plaintiff that the statute of limitations on the debt had already expired.
The Background: The plaintiff received a Model Validation Notice from the defendant last November. The MVN’s itemization table uses August 23, 2020 as the itemization date. The complaint alleges that this date is beyond the statute of limitations for a credit card debt in New York and that the notice fails to warn the plaintiff that if a payment is made toward the debt that the statute of limitations may be restarted.
- As well, in the section above the itemization table, the notice states, “Our information shows: You had a credit card from , with account number … which was acquired by …” the name of the current creditor to whom the debt is owed. The notice fails to identify the original creditor. The plaintiff allegedly had no way to identify the debt because the name of the original creditor was not included and the plaintiff did not recognize the name of the current creditor to whom the debt is owed.
The Claim: The suit accuses the defendant of violating Sections 1692d, 1692e(2)(A), 1692e(10), 1692f, and 1692g of the FDCPA.
- The plaintiff seeks to include anyone else living in New York who received a similar Model Validation Notice from the defendant that failed to inform the consumer that the statute of limitations had expired. It does not include any reference to the omission of the name of the original creditor.
