Sometimes, just answering the phone is enough to get you sued. But, thankfully, a District Court judge in Louisiana has granted a collection law firm’s motion to dismiss claims it violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.
The background: The plaintiff opened a credit card account with a credit union that was eventually charged off after remaining unpaid for more than six months. When the plaintiff called the credit union to discuss the debt, she was referred to a collection law firm, which then provided her with the phone number of another law firm representing the creditor.
- That brief exchange was the extent of the interaction, but it ultimately led to this lawsuit. The plaintiff later filed multiple actions in both state and federal courts against various parties involved in the collection process, including the law firm that had simply answered her call.
- After the other defendants were dismissed or the cases were remanded, the only remaining claim was an alleged FDCPA violation against the law firm. The plaintiff, representing herself, claimed the law firm’s conduct caused “reputational harm” and a “denial of credit.”
The ruling: Judge Sarah S. Vance of the District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana dismissed the case, ruling that the plaintiff lacked standing because she failed to allege any concrete injury connected to the firm’s actions.
- “The only factual allegation against [the defendant] is that [it] answered the phone when [the plaintiff] called and provided her with a phone number of a different law firm,” Judge Vance wrote. “There is nothing to suggest that [this] injured her in any way, let alone harmed her reputation or led to her being denied credit.”
- Citing Spokeo v. Robins and TransUnion v. Ramirez, the court reiterated that “an injury in law is not an injury in fact,” and that plaintiffs must show a concrete and particularized harm even when alleging a statutory violation.
- With no evidence of injury, Judge Vance dismissed the claim without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
