A District Court judge in Massachusetts has granted a defendant’s motion for summary judgment in a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act lawsuit, ruling that the defendant was the rightful owner of the accounts in question, was allowed to report the debts to the credit reporting agencies, responded to the plaintiff’s validation requests, and did not contact the plaintiff at inconvenient times or places.
The Background: The defendant purchased two separate credit card debts that were owed by the plaintiff. In both cases, the original creditor and the defendant each sent the plaintiff a letter informing him of the sale of his debt. The plaintiff made no payments on either debt after the sales were concluded. The defendant reported the debts to the credit reporting agencies. The plaintiff made two requests to validate each debt, to which the defendant responded. The plaintiff made no other communications with the defendant, nor did he dispute the debts with the defendant or the credit reporting agencies.
- The defendant placed several calls to the plaintiff attempting to collect on the unpaid debts.
- The plaintiff filed suit, alleging the defendant contacted him at a place and time known to be inconvenient, used false, deceptive, or misleading representations in connection with the collection of a debt, failed to validate his debt upon written request, neglected to provide a required notice of the debt upon first contact, and made a false representation to the three credit reporting agencies regarding his debt.
The Ruling: The defendant submitted a statement indicating that all calls were made between 8am and 9pm, that it never received a dispute or written debt validation requests from the plaintiff, that it did not submit false or misleading information to the credit reporting agencies, and did everything it was supposed to. Judge Allison D. Burroughs of the District Court for the District of Massachusetts agreed with the defendant and granted the defendant’s motion regarding the claims it violated the FDCPA.
- The plaintiff also accused the defendant of violating Massachusetts state law regarding the information that the defendant reported to the credit reporting agencies, but Judge Burroughs agreed with the defendant that the Fair Credit Reporting Act preempts state laws. And even if it didn’t, the plaintiff’s claim would fail on its merits. The plaintiff owed amounts on both debts and did not pay them. “There is no information suggesting that there are any inaccuracies on Plaintiff’s credit report relating to either the Accounts, or that PRA ever received any information alerting them to an alleged inaccuracy,” Judge Burroughs wrote.
