A recent case from a Wisconsin district court serves as a reminder that the best approach to a 1692g notice is that it stands alone. In Maniaci v. The Receivable Management Services Corp., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 109087 (E.D....more
A recent opinion from the Fifth Circuit should serve as a reminder to debt collectors that their duties as to disputed debts are not governed solely by section 1692g. In Sayles v. Advanced Recovery Systems, Advanced Recovery...more
A recent decision from a Louisiana district court should provide some comfort to banks and other financial institutions who acquire other entities by merger – at least in the Fifth Circuit, they are not debt collectors. ...more
This week the CFPB filed suit in the Northern District of Ohio against Weltman, Weinberg & Reis, an Ohio law firm. The complaint is a continuation of the CFPB’s attack on collection law firms and their level of meaningful...more
An Illinois district court has taken a broad view of standing under section 1692e of the FDCPA. In Koval v. Harris & Harris, Ltd., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53124 (N.D. Ill. Apr. 5, 2017), a demand letter addressed to Michael...more
A consumer who sued a debt collector over an inaccurate statement as to the amount of a settlement offer recently saw his complaint dismissed for lack of standing. In Allgire v. HOVG, LLC, the plaintiff was contacted...more
A summons which stated the consumer had thirty days to answer a debt collection suit did not violate the FDCPA when the state rules of civil procedure only provided for twenty days. In Bryant v. Kass Shuler, P.A., the...more
A district court from New York recently ruled that even assuming a creditor’s initial TILA disclosures falls short under the statutory requirements, the plaintiff must show an injury in fact in order to have standing under...more
3/13/2017
/ Article III ,
Consumer Lenders ,
Credit Cards ,
Disclosure Requirements ,
Fees ,
Financial Institutions ,
Injury-in-Fact ,
Motion to Dismiss ,
Retailers ,
Standing ,
Truth in Lending Act (TILA)
A recent district court opinion from Michigan makes clear that statutory violations of the FDCPA do not absolve a plaintiff from the need to show a concrete injury in order to establish Article III standing. In Johnston v....more
The CFPB continues to flex its muscle and expand its reach, this time punishing a prepaid card provider and its vendor for a conversion to a new system that did not go as planned. The consent order, which was entered into...more
The CFPB has issued its monthly complaint report and is shining its spotlight on mortgage products. The Monthly Complaint Report provides a high level snap shot of trends in consumer complaints, using a three month rolling...more
2/17/2017
/ Banking Sector ,
Consumer Financial Products ,
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) ,
Consumer Lenders ,
Debt Collection ,
Escrow Accounts ,
Financial Institutions ,
Loans ,
Mortgage Lenders ,
Mortgage Servicers ,
Mortgages ,
Prepaid Payment Products ,
Real Estate Market ,
Student Loans
A district court out of Missouri has served up a reminder as to the limitations of a motion to dismiss based upon subject matter jurisdiction. In May v. Consumer Adjustment Co., the consumer filed an FDCPA complaint is state...more
2/13/2017
/ Article III ,
Debt Collection ,
Demand Letter ,
FDCPA ,
Financial Institutions ,
Financial Services Industry ,
Injury-in-Fact ,
Motion to Dismiss ,
Spokeo v Robins ,
Standing ,
Subject Matter Jurisdiction
The CFPB’s concern with incentives and overdrafts continues and has resulted in a lawsuit filed against a Minnesota based TCF National Bank. In the lawsuit, the CFPB alleges that TCF National Bank violated the UDAAP...more
1/24/2017
/ Banks ,
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) ,
Consumer Protection Laws ,
EFTA ,
Enforcement Actions ,
Financial Institutions ,
Incentive Awards ,
Informed Consent ,
Opt-In ,
Overdraft Fees ,
Regulation E ,
UDAAP