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 of the earliest lessons that people in collections learn is to not say something unless you intend to follow through on it. A collection operation is facing claims of violating the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, state law in Arkansas, and invasion of privacy for allegedly texting the brother and sister of the plaintiff and informing them about the existence of a debt and for sending text messages to the plaintiff directly implying that a collection lawsuit was going to be filed when it had no intention of doing so, according to the complaint, which also named the owner and manager of the collection operation as a defendant.
The background: The debt at issue originated as a payday loan taken out for personal purposes. The account allegedly defaulted before being sold or transferred to the defendant for collection.
- The defendant allegedly texted the plaintiff’s brother identifying itself as a “claims manager” looking to speak with the plaintiff or his attorney, without the plaintiff’s consent to make that contact.
- A similar disclosure was allegedly made to the plaintiff’s sister.
- The complaint contends these communications were designed deliberately to embarrass the plaintiff into paying.
- On the direct outreach side, the defendant allegedly sent the plaintiff multiple messages warning of an upcoming deadline for “filing purposes,” suggesting the creditor was “ready to proceed,” and indicating the case was being outsourced for “further action.” One message reportedly closed with “voluntary options on this case are now null and void, and a recommendation will be made to proceed and process the claim for recovery. Good luck!”
- The complaint alleges the defendant had no actual intention of suing the plaintiff at the time these messages were sent and had not filed suit against any Arkansas resident for breach of contract in the prior decade.
- The defendant is also accused of failing to identify itself as a debt collector in any communication, failing to provide the required debt validation notice in its first communication, and never informing the plaintiff of his right to dispute the debt.
The claims: The complaint accuses the defendant of violating Section 1692c(b) of the FDCPA for communicating with the plaintiff’s brother and sister without the plaintiff’s consent, disclosing information about the debt to third parties in the process.
- The complaint also brings invasion of privacy claims against all three defendants, alleging that the intrusion upon the plaintiff’s private affairs through the third-party contacts would be highly offensive to a reasonable person.
- The complaint also accuses the defendant of violating Section 1692d of the FDCPA for allegedly contacting the plaintiff’s family members, Section 1692e for sending the plaintiff a series of text messages implying that a lawsuit was imminent, noting the defendant has not filed suit against any Arkansas resident for breach of contract in the prior decade and allegedly had no intention of doing so here, Section 1692e(11) for failing to identify itself as a debt collector in any of its communications with the plaintiff, and Section 1692g for failing to provide the validation notice.
