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 collector has been accused of violating the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and the Electronic Funds Transfer Act for automatically withdrawing funds to satisfy a student loan, despite the plaintiff never attending any classes or logging in to see them online.
The Background: Back in 2018, the plaintiff signed up for remote college classes with Salem University and incurred a debt of $6,000. The plaintiff had allegedly been advised that if she was unable to log in to the classes or otherwise attend them, she would be able to drop out of the classes automatically and would not be obligated to make any of the tuition payments.
- The plaintiff allegedly never attended any classes — either in person or online — and believed she was automatically dropped from the course.
- The defendant allegedly never sent any communications about the debt, but started debiting the plaintiff’s bank accounts. The amounts were different and were electronic funds transfers that allegedly had no authorization or prior notice.
- The transfers started at $42 per month and increased to $72 per month.
- The plaintiff was forced to cancel her debit card with her bank as a means of getting the transfers to stop.
The Claims: The plaintiff claims the defendant violated Sections 1692d, 1692e, 1692e(2), 1692e(5), 1692e(7), 1692e(9), 1692e(10), 1692e(11), 1692f, 1692f(1), 1692f(2), 1692f(4), 1692f(5), and 1692g of the FDCPA, as well as the Electronic Funds Transfer Act and Minnesota state law.
- The complaint also accuses the defendant of fraud.
