Five reasons to sue a debt collector that violates the FDCPA
August 9, 2011 by Todd Murray · Leave a Comment
1. Up to $1,000 in statutory damages. If you bring a successful FDCPA case, the court will award you up to $1,000 in statutory damages. These damages are provided by law as a penalty against a debt collector that violated the FDCPA and you don’t have to prove that you suffered any actual harm to be awarded statutory damages. Although there are rare cases where a court awards a consumer less than $1,000, in most cases the consumer is awarded the full $1,000.
2. Provable actual damages. If a debt collector’s abuse has caused you to cry or lose sleep or if the collector’s harassment has affected your relationship with your loved ones or your performance at work, you may be able to recover actual damages. Not every consumer will suffer actual damages due to a collector’s conduct, but if you can successfully prove that you’ve suffered tangible harm, you’re entitled to compensation for that suffering.
3. A free attorney. Probably the most important remedy under the FDCPA is the fee-shifting provision. This means that if you win your case, the collector has to pay your attorney fees. Because of this, most consumer attorneys take FDCPA cases on a full contingency fee, which means that you don’t have to give your lawyer any money up front. Your attorney gets paid by the debt collector or gets a percentage of any out-of-court settlement.
4. Your litigation costs are covered. Litigation can be expensive. The costs for filing fees, service fees, deposition transcripts, etc. can quickly add up. But if you win your FDCPA case, the debt collector has to pay all of your court costs.
5. Hold the debt collector accountable. When the FDCPA was enacted, Congress gave each individual consumer the right to sue a debt collector for violating the Act. The idea was that consumers and their attorneys would act as “private attorney generals” by holding debt collectors that violate the FDCPA accountable for their conduct through private lawsuits. Debt collectors love to lecture consumers about taking “personal responsibility” for paying their bills. An FDCPA lawsuit is a chance to turn this argument right back around at the debt collector and force them to take responsibility for their illegal debt collection tactics.
If you’re dealing with debt collectors, make sure to download and use my free debt collection call log so that you can document all of the debt collectors’ communications. And if a debt collector does anything that you think was unfair; untrue; or harassing or abusive, please contact me to discuss the situation further. I offer a free case review for all FDCPA cases and if I agree to handle your case, you won’t have to pay me any money up front. My fees come from the money I recover from you if you win your case or accept a negotiated settlement.
Plaintiff awarded $1.26 million in New Mexico FDCPA case
August 1, 2011 by Todd Murray · Leave a Comment
Last week, a New Mexico jury awarded a consumer $1.26 million in a FDCPA suit in New Mexico. The jury awarded $161,000 in actual damages and whopping $1.1 million in punitive damages.
The case involved repeated attempts–including two wage garnishments–to collect a debt from a person that did not owe it. Although the plaintiff in the case had the same name as the actual debtor, she persistently told the debt collector that the debt did not belong to her. Even her employer got involved: when the debt collector served the garnishment papers, the employer told the debt collector that they were attempting to garnish the wrong person. And it turns out that they were. During the proceedings, it was revealed that the original creditor had provided the debt collector with the contact information for the correct debtor, but that the debt collector manually changed the contact information to that of the similarly-named non-debtor. And although the debt collector asserted that the mistake was a result of a bona fide error–which is a defense to a FDCPA claim–apparently, the jury did not buy their argument. And probably for a good reason. In my opinion, it’s difficult to argue bona fide error when you originally had the correct contact information, altered it to pursue the wrong person, and ignored that person’s (and her employer’s) repeated warnings that the collector had the wrong person.
Jury Awards Plaintiff $1.26 million in FDCPA Violation Lawsuit | InsideARM | July 31, 2011
If you’re dealing with debt collectors, make sure to download and use my free debt collection call log so that you can document all of the debt collectors’ communications. And if a debt collector does anything that you think was unfair; untrue; or harassing or abusive, please contact me to discuss the situation further. I offer a free case review for all FDCPA cases and if I agree to handle your case, you won’t have to pay me any money up front. My fees come from the money I recover from you if you win your case or accept a negotiated settlement.
A simple test for figuring out whether a debt collector violated the FDCPA
July 20, 2011 by Todd Murray · Leave a Comment
I’ve written a great deal (for example: see this post, this post, and this post) about what specific debt collector conduct violates the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. But the easiest way, perhaps, to figure out whether a debt collector has run afoul of the FDCPA is to think about the Act more broadly.
Without getting into specifics, the FDPCA prohibits debt collectors from doing anything that is (1) unfair; (2) untrue; or (3) harassing or abusive. Obviously, the Act lists a number of specific debt collection tactics that fall into these three categories. But the FDCPA also makes it very clear that any debt collection conduct–whether specifically listed in the Act or not–that is unfair, untrue, or harassing and abusive is a FDCPA violation.
So rather than poring over the text of the FDCPA or reading dozens of articles on the internet, just ask yourself this question: did the collector do something that was unfair; untrue; or harassing or abusive? If your answer to this simple question is yes, there’s a good chance that the debt collector violated the FDCPA and your next move should be to contact a consumer rights lawyer.
If you’re dealing with debt collectors, make sure to download and use my free debt collection call log so that you can document all of the debt collectors’ communications. And if a debt collector does anything that you think was unfair; untrue; or harassing or abusive, please contact me to discuss the situation further. I offer a free case review for all FDCPA cases and if I agree to handle your case, you won’t have to pay me any money up front. My fees come from the money I recover from you if you win your case or accept a negotiated settlement.
Photo: http://www.flickr.com/photos/typicalgenius/2395906902/
Delaware courts order debt buyers to submit detailed proof with every collection lawsuit
July 7, 2011 by Todd Murray · Leave a Comment
The Chief Judge of the Court of Common Pleas in Delaware has issued an administrative directive that requires debt buyers to submit detailed proof with each collection lawsuit. The order mandates that debt buyers include the name of the original creditor, the last four digits of the account number, the name of the debt buyer purporting to currently own the debt, a complete list of every prior owner of the debt, and an itemized breakdown of the balance sought. Debt buyers are also required to attach a copy of the original contract and the complete chain of assignments from the original creditor to the current debt buyer. If a debt buyer fails to include the required information and documents, the directive gives the court the power–on its own initiative–to dismiss the debt buyer’s lawsuit.
These requirements may seem like common sense, but debt buyers often obtain judgments without submitting any proof that: (a) the consumer owes the debt; and (b) that the debt buyer is the rightful owner of the debt. This usually happens when the consumer fails to properly respond to the lawsuit, which happens in the majority of debt buyer lawsuits.
The Minnesota legislature has flirted with bills that require debt buyers to submit similar proof with their lawsuits, but as far as I know, Delaware is the first state where the judiciary has taken this matter into their own hands.
ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTIVE NO. 2011-1 OF THE CHIEF JUDGE OF THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS FOR THE STATE OF DELAWARE | March 16, 2011 (PDF)
Chase dismisses thousands of consumer collection lawsuits
July 5, 2011 by Todd Murray · Leave a Comment
According to Consumerist and the Wall Street Journal, Chase has dismissed a bunch of debt collection lawsuits against consumers nationwide. Several of my consumer colleagues have speculated that this move is spurred by the recent robo-signing scandal. I’ve even heard (unsubstantiated) rumors that there has been some housecleaning in upper management of Chase’s credit card litigation department. In any event, this is good news for consumers.
Chase Drops Thousands Of Debt Collection Cases Against Borrowers | Consumerist | July 1, 2011
Lender Drops Pursuit of Debt | The Wall Street Journal | June 24, 2011 (subscriber content)
Find out now if I can help you:
