FDCPA

The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) is meant to protect consumer debtors by requiring that debt collectors provide the truthful and accurate information necessary for them to make informed decisions. The complaint for this class action alleges that Penn Credit Corporation did not send consumers accurate information on how to dispute a debt.   

The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) was designed to prevent abuse or unfair practices when third-party debt collectors try to collect consumer debts. The complaint for this class action alleges that Phoenix Financial Services, LLC violated the FDCPA in its various attempts to collect a medical debt from the plaintiff in this case.

The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) requires that debt collectors provide consumers with certain information, either at their initial contact with the consumer or within five days of it. The complaint for this class action alleges that Medical Data Systems, Inc., which does business as Medical Revenue Service (MRS) misled consumers by telling them they should dispute debts in writing. 

The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) is meant to protect consumers from improper, misleading, or abusive debt collection. California has a similar state law, the Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (RFDCPA). The complaint for this class action claims that Monarch Recovery Management, Inc. has violated both laws in the way it represents the consumer’s right to dispute the validity of the debt.

The complaint for this class action alleges that Velocity Investments, LLC improperly sues consumers for loans which it does not have the right to collect on. The complaint cites the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) and Pennsylvania’s  Fair Credit Extension Uniformity Act (FCEUA) and Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law (UTPCPL). However, very important to this case is the state’s Consumer Discount Company Act (CDCA).

The complaint for this class action alleges that M&T Bank charges mortgage borrowers illegal Pay-to-Pay fees when they make payments over the telephone. The complaint claims that these fees are illegal, both under federal and state laws. At issue are the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) and California’s Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (RFDCPA) and the terms of the mortgage contract.

The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) tries to help consumers who owe debts by forbidding abuse and requiring clarity, accuracy, and information about the debtor’s rights. The complaint for this class action details multiple alleged violations of the FDCPA by a single defendant—Nationwide Credit, Inc.—on behalf of three consumers. The problems lie in the notice of validation rights.

The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) requires that debt collectors provide certain information to consumer debtors, either at the first communication or within five days thereafter. One of those pieces of information is the amount of the debt, including whether and how the amount will increase. The complaint for this class action alleges that Universal Fidelity, LP has sent out debt collections letters that do not state the amount of the debt at all. 

The complaint for this class action alleges that Lawgix Lawyers, LLC, Lawgix, Inc., and attorney Michael D. Johnson provided false contact information in legal documentation. US Bank, NA is also named as a defendant, because the contact number provided went to US Bank and because the filings concerned a debt with US Bank that had already been satisfied. The complaint brings its allegations under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA).  

Different states have different statutes of limitations for consumer debts. After it expires, the consumer can no longer be sued for the debt. However, even a small payment can revive it, and the person can once again be sued. The complaint for this class action alleges that Midland Credit Management, Inc., in trying to collect a debt for Midland Funding, LLC, did not inform consumer that if they paid anything on the debt, they could once again be sued. The complaint says this violates the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA).