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.
Well, that escalated quickly. We’re definitely living in a less-patient society than we used to. A plaintiff has filed a lawsuit, accusing a collection operation of violating the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act because it failed to mark an account as disputed. The kicker? From the time the dispute was received by the defendant to the time the lawsuit was filed was less than three weeks.
The background: In late April, the plaintiff checked his credit report on Credit Karma and noticed that the defendant was furnishing information about an unpaid debt in the amount of $568.
- In mid-May, the plaintiff sent the defendant a letter via certified mail, indicating that he had “no obligation of paying this debt, and I will not be submitting and payment partial or otherwise.”
- The letter was received by the defendant on May 22, according to the complaint. This was the Thursday before Memorial Day.
- The day after Memorial Day, May 27, the plaintiff checked his credit report again via Credit Karma and noticed that the defendant had “several communications with the consumer reporting agencies and all Debt Collectors did not communicate that the Plaintiff is disputing the account,” according to the complaint.
- Less than two weeks later, the plaintiff filed this lawsuit.
The claims: The defendant is accused of violating Section 1692e(8) of the FDCPA by publishing false information about the plaintiff by failing to report to the credit reporting agencies that the plaintiff was disputing the debt.
- The defendant’s actions caused the plaintiff’s personal and credit reputation to be “severely damaged” according to the complaint.
