Unsolicited Cell Phone Calls
The Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) places limitations on how businesses may contact consumers. These limitations are valid for debt collectors as well. The complaint for this class action alleges that Eagle Recovery Associates, Inc. ignored an attorney’s letter in order to contact the plaintiff in this case, in violation of the TCPA.
According to the complaint for this class action, Comenity Bank “bears the dubious distinction of perhaps being the most abusive robocalling debt collector in the country.” The complaint brings suit not under debt collection laws but primarily under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA).
Does Lyft, Inc. look for drivers via calls which violate the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA)? The complaint for this class action alleges that Lyft “has a policy and regular practice of placing calls, or knowingly sanctioning such calls, to consumers using a prerecorded or automated voice and an ATDS” or an automated telephone dialing system.
Does Keller Williams Realty, Inc. teach its realtors to break the law? The complaint for this class action alleges that, during their training, Keller Williams realtors are told to get leads and to make calls with automatic dialing systems, in ways that may violate the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA).
Every week brings the filing of more class actions against companies who are accused of violating the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). Have they never heard of this law, or do they simply not care? In this case, it’s a technical school called Universal Technical Institute, Inc. that is alleged to have violated the law against invading the privacy of consumers with telemarketing calls.
The Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) requires companies who do telemarketing to maintain internal Do Not Call lists and honor consumer requests to be put on these lists. However, the complaint for this class action alleges that Oxford Marketing Partners, LLC does not honor such requests—and that this is in addition to unlawfully contacting consumers to begin with.
PTZ Insurance Agency, Ltd. and Pethealth are paying $5.5 million to settle a class action alleging the companies violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). The complaint alleged that the companies placed unwanted calls to consumer cell phones to remind consumers of a thirty-day gift of insurance.
The complaint begins by asserting, “Comenity remains one of, if the not the most abusive, robodialer in the country.” It is referring to Comenity Bank, which it claims “blasted Plaintiff’s cellular telephone with over 379 calls … in the span of two months” for an account that it claims was only one month delinquent. The complaint brings suit under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA).
Debt collectors may contact a consumer debtor by picking up a receiver and dialing a number individually. What they may not do is call consumer cell phones using automatic dialing equipment, according to the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). This class action brings suit against Direct Energy Services, LLC under the TCPA and the Texas Debt Collection Act (TDCA).
At issue in this case are not just the usual violations of the TCPA and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). It is Comenity Bank NA’s alleged practice of calling the friends and family of debtors. The complaint put its central charge this way: “Comenity has a corporate policy of repeatedly contacting family and friends of debtors … using this as a tool to humiliate and embarrass debtors as well as to intentionally cause aggravation and annoyance to their relatives and friends.”