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.
There are lawsuits that, when you read the allegations, lead you to question the choices that were made by the defendant. Then, there are lawsuits that, when you read the allegations, lead you to question what the defendant should have done differently. This case appears to be the latter of those two scenarios. A collection operation is being sued for allegedly violating the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act because it attempted to collect on an unpaid healthcare debt that should have been covered by the Veterans Administration, yet the allegations in the complaint never make mention of the plaintiff communicating with the defendant in any way.
The background: Back in 2021, the plaintiff suffered a heart attack and was transported to a hospital in an ambulance. The owner of the ambulance claimed the plaintiff owed $2,587.73 for the trip to the hospital.
- All of the other bills incurred by the plaintiff related to his heart attack were paid by the VA, according to the complaint.
- This past January, the plaintiff received a “collection letter” from the defendant attempting to collect on the unpaid ambulance bill. The complaint indicates that this letter was the first time the plaintiff had learned that the bill was not taken care of by the VA.
- The plaintiff contacted the VA, and was told that the ambulance company failed to “timely and properly” submit a bill for the service that it provided to the patient.
- The VA also allegedly informed the plaintiff that the ambulance company had sent the plaintiff two billing statements to an incorrect or incomplete address for the plaintiff, which he never received, and try to call the plaintiff four times, but called a number that belonged to the plaintiff’s ex-wife, with whom the plaintiff has had no contact in 10 years. How the VA knew this is anyone’s guess.
- Rather than try and contact the defendant, the plaintiff filed this suit, alleging the defendant violated the FDCPA. The defendant’s actions upset and disturbed the plaintiff and its “continued pressure” made it difficult for the plaintiff to “make an intelligent decision as to whether he needed to pay the debt, or instead be subject to threatening collection actions, if he did not voluntarily pay the disputed debt.” There’s no mention anywhere before this of the debt being disputed, by the way.
The claims: The complaint alleges the defendant violated Sections 1692e, 1692e(2)(A), 1692e(5), 1692e(8), 1692e(10), 1692f, and 1692f(1) of the FDCPA. The plaintiff is seeking awards for actual and statutory damages.
