A District Court judge in Oklahoma has dismissed yet another “inconvenient” time or place case under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act in which a plaintiff mails a letter to the defendant requesting or demanding that all future contact between the parties be conducted via email, ruling that both the FDCPA and Regulation F gave the defendant the authority to respond via traditional mail and not via email.
The background: As in many of these cases, the background that leads up to the lawsuit being filed is similar. The plaintiff sent the defendant a communication via traditional mail in which she requests that the defendant only communicate with her via email going forward. When the defendant sent a communication back to the plaintiff via traditional mail, the plaintiff filed suit, accusing the defendant of violating Section 1692c(a)(1) of the FDCPA.
The ruling: Having already denied a request from the plaintiff to remand the case back to state court, Judge Jodi W. Dishman of the District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma set to work on the defendant’s motion to dismiss. Putting aside that Section 1692c(a)(1) of the FDCPA deals with communications that are inconvenient because of the time and place in which they are made and not the channel, Judge Dishman noted that both the FDCPA and Regulation F allow the defendant to communicate with the plaintiff via mail in certain circumstances.
- When a consumer disputes a debt and requests verification, the FDCPA requires the collector to mail verification to the consumer, which it did in this case.
- Section 1006.14(h)(2) of Regulation F provides three exceptions under which a collector is allowed to communicate with an individual outside of the medium that the consumer has requested. Those are:
- (i) If a person opts out of receiving electronic communications from a debt collector, a debt collector may send an electronic confirmation of the person’s request to opt out, provided that the electronic confirmation contains no information other than a statement confirming the person’s request and that the debt collector will honor it;
- (ii) If a person initiates contact with a debt collector using a medium of communication that the person previously requested the debt collector not use, the debt collector may respond once through the same medium of communication used by the person; or
- (iii) If otherwise required by applicable law, a debt collector may communicate or attempt to communicate with a person in connection with the collection of any debt through a medium of communication that the person has requested the debt collector not use to communicate with the person.
- The actions of the defendant fall squarely in (ii) and (iii) of Section 1006.14(h)(2), Judge Dishman noted, granting the defendant’s motion to dismiss.
