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 operation is facing a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act class-action lawsuit because it allegedly attempted to collect on a debt that had been settled between the plaintiff and the original creditor before the defendant began to make its collection attempts.
The Background: Back in July 2019 the plaintiff and the original creditor allegedly entered into an agreement to settle and close the plaintiff’s credit card account. The agreement required the plaintiff to make three payments of roughly the same amount by the end of each month, starting with July. The plaintiff allegedly remitted all three payments and settled the debt. The three payments totaled $771.81. The last payment was made on Oct. 14, 2019. The statement that was included as an exhibit with the complaint indicated that $1,677.54 of the debt had been charged off on October 20.
- Nearly two years later, the defendant sent the plaintiff a Model Validation Notice attempting to collect on the unpaid debt. The MVN indicated the amount of the debt was $1,667.91 and that the last payment date was Oct. 14, 2019. The MVN indicated the date of default was October 20, 2019.
- The plaintiff contacted the defendant to share the details of the agreement she had with the original creditor. The defendant asked fr proof of the settlement agreement and the corresponding payments, which the plaintiff said she sent. The defendant “refused to acknowledge” the settlement and has continued to attempt to collect on the debt, according to the complaint.
The Claims: The plaintiff is accusing the defendant of violating Sections 1692e(2)(a), 1692e(10), 1692f, and 1692f(1) of the FDCPA.
- The complaint seeks to include anyone else living in the state of Michigan who received a collection letter from the defendant that was attempting to collect a debt that was previously settled or paid in full.
