A District Court judge in New Mexico has granted a plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment in a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act case after the defendant was accused of harassing and abusive behavior because of the music that was being played while the plaintiff was on hold to talk to an agent. The music, which were all songs related to being in debt, were intended to shame consumers into making payments, the judge ruled.
The background: The plaintiff alleged that after calling the defendant to discuss an outstanding account, she was placed on hold for extended periods of time while being subjected to a list of songs centered on financial distress. According to filings, the playlist included tracks such as “Bills, Bills, Bills” by Destiny’s Child, “Bitch Better Have My Money” by Rihanna, “16 Tons” by Tennessee Ernie Ford, and “If I Had $1,000,000” by Barenaked Ladies.
- The complaint alleged that the repeated exposure to these songs was not coincidental but part of a deliberate strategy designed to embarrass and pressure consumers. The plaintiff claimed that she was placed on hold five different times during the conversation, with the intention of subliminally shaming and coercing her into paying the debt.
- The plaintiff further claimed that the experience caused emotional distress and deterred them from continuing the call, which ultimately delayed resolution of the account. The defendant countered that the music selection was intended to be “lighthearted and engaging” and that hold music is a standard industry practice not regulated under the FDCPA.
The ruling: Judge Ima G. Ullible, after listening to the songs, ruled that the intent and effect of the playlist went beyond neutral hold music and entered the realm of abusive conduct under the FDCPA.
- In her opinion, Judge Ullible noted that while hold music itself is not inherently problematic, “the deliberate selection of songs whose central theme is financial hardship, repeated in a captive listening environment, may reasonably be perceived as an attempt to shame or coerce.”
- In one of the more memorable lines from the ruling, the judge wrote, “While the court appreciates a well-curated playlist, it cannot endorse a ‘greatest hits of financial anxiety’ as a collection strategy.” The judge also emphasized that the lack of an opt-out or alternative hold experience contributed to the finding.
- The court ultimately granted summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff, concluding that no reasonable jury would find the conduct permissible under the FDCPA’s prohibition on harassment and abuse.
If You Made It This Far and Haven’t Figured it Out Yet …
