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 frequent refrain during webinars and at conference is, if you are going to communicate with someone via a digital channel like text messaging or email, you need to be able and ready to accept communications back from consumers in those channels. A collection operation is facing a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act case because it did not take this step.
The Background: The plaintiff received a pair of text messages from the defendant. The messages said:
- “This is a message from [Defendant] (a debt collector) regarding FARMERS. We provide self-service options @ sms.[defendant].com. Reference File #05002013383. To opt out, reply STOP. “
- The plaintiff responded to the messages, saying “I refuse to pay this debt.”
- The defendant replied back, saying, “[Defendant] (a debt collector) does not monitor this telephone number. For help, please call ###-###-####. Thank you.”
The Claims: The plaintiff filed suit, accusing the defendant of violating Section 1692c(c) of the FDCPA because the response from the defendant to the refusal to pay was not one of the three exceptions allowed under the statute. Those exceptions are: advising the consumer that further collection efforts are being terminated, that the collector may invoke specified remedies which are ordinarily invoked by such debt collector, or that the debt collector intends to invoke a specified remedy.
- The plaintiff claims the defendant’s actions caused her to suffer frustration, sleeplessness, anxiety, emotional distress, and the loss of focus at work because she was worried what else the company may do to deprive her of her rights.
