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.
This particular complaint boils down to communication — communication between the original creditor and the consumer and then the collector and the consumer.
The Background: After falling behind on a debt, the plaintiff checked his credit report in September 2022 to find that the creditor was reporting the account as closed. The plaintiff contacted the creditor and was informed that the defendant was now handling the account.
- The plaintiff then got in touch with the defendant, and agreed to settle the balance for less than the total amount that was owed. The defendant said it would send out a letter confirming the account had been settled within three days and then send another letter within 30 days. The plaintiff electronically signed a settlement via email and received a confirmation email that the payment had been made.
- The plaintiff never received those letters.
- On October 2, the plaintiff received a summons and complaint that alleged a breach of contract for the same debt. The defendant had never indicated that a lawsuit had been filed or was due to be filed, according to the complaint.
- The complaint was served at the address of the plaintiff’s mother, which required the plaintiff to spend a significant amount of time and travel expenses to pick up the complaint.
- A month later, the defendant sent the plaintiff a letter — through his attorney — responding to the plaintiff’s request to validate the debt. The letter made no mention of the payment that had been made back in September.
The Complaint: The complaint accuses the defendant of violating Sections 1692d, 1692e, and 1692f of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.
