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.
One phone call. That is all it can take to face a class-action lawsuit. A collection operation is facing claims it violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, and state law in Florida because it placed a phone call to the plaintiff’s cell phone after the plaintiff sent a letter to the defendant requesting validation of the debt and asking the defendant not to contact the plaintiff until the validity of the debt was confirmed.
The background: The plaintiff received a letter in the mail from the defendant back in April. The plaintiff responded, sending a letter of his own back to the defendant, requesting validation of the debt and asking not to be contacted until the debt had been verified.
- The day after the letter from the plaintiff was reportedly received by the defendant, it placed a call to his cell phone, and left a pre-recorded message. The message requested the plaintiff contact the defendant to be connected to a live representative regarding the account in question.
- The plaintiff did not provide his consent to be contacted by the defendant, according to the complaint.
- The complaint does not include the letter that the defendant sent to the plaintiff; only the plaintiff’s letter to the defendant.
The claims: The suit accuses the defendant of violating Section 227(b)(1)(A)(iii) of the TCPA by making a pre-recorded call to the plaintiff without his consent, Section 1692c(c) of the FDCPA by initiating communications after they had been requested to be ceased, and Florida state law.
- The suit seeks to include three classes — one of people who received a pre-recorded call on their cell phone from the defendant, one who received a communication from the defendant after requesting the defendant cease from initiating communications, and one for people who live in Florida and received a communication after requesting that the defendant cease from initiating communications.
