A Magistrate Court judge in Colorado has granted a defendant’s motion for summary judgment in a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act case on the grounds that it was entitled to the “bona fide error” defense after it was accused of misrepresenting the debt that the plaintiff owed.
The Background: The defendant purchased a delinquent credit card account from a creditor in December 2022. The account showed a balance of $325.99. After reviewing the account data, the defendant sent a validation notice to the plaintiff, indicating she owed the stated amount. The plaintiff disputed the debt in January 2023, claiming it had been paid off. She provided a partial credit report showing a zero balance and a payment history. The defendant marked the account to take no further action, but did not receive confirmation of the paid-off status from the creditor until after the lawsuit was filed. The plaintiff claimed the defendant was in possession of documents indicating the account was paid off when it communicated with the plaintiff about the account.
The Ruling: The court found that the defendant had followed its standard procedures to verify the debt, including reviewing the account data provided by the creditor. The court determined that any error in attempting to collect the debt was unintentional and that the defendant had reasonable procedures in place to avoid such errors. Consequently, the court granted summary judgment to defendant, concluding that it was entitled to the bona fide error defense under the FDCPA. The ruling underscores the importance of maintaining and following thorough verification procedures in debt collection practices.
- “Plaintiff has presented no evidence — nor could she — disputing that [the defendant] could not have had access to those documents before it sent the January 17, 2023 letter,” wrote Judge Susan Prose of the District Court for the District of Colorado. “In short, she has failed to come forward with evidence sufficient to create a material fact dispute on the second element of the bona fide error defense, i.e., that [the defendant’s] error concerning the status of the Account was, objectively, a good-faith error. On the evidence presented, no rational jury could find otherwise.”
