Skip to content Skip to navigation

"Wrong number" calls

LoanCare Logo

Automatically-dialed calls are annoying, but even more annoying are automatically-dialed calls intended for other persons. The complaint for this class action alleges that LoanCare, LLC made automatically-dialed calls to consumer cell phones without permission, in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA).

I3 Group Logo

Even debt collection companies must obey the provisions of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA)—and violations are all the more maddening when the person who receives the calls is not the person who owes money. The complaint for this class action alleges that the I3 Group, LLC violated the law when it called consumers without permission, attempting to collect debts. 

Comcast Sign with Name and Logo

Sometimes companies insist on calling consumers’ cell phones not because they’re trying to telemarket to them, but because they’re trying to reach other parties who are not at that number. Even so, the complaint for this class action notes that this is still a violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA).

Flagship Credit Acceptance Logo

Flagship Credit Acceptance is paying $4 million to settle a class action alleging it violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA).

Comenity Logo

Unwanted calls from companies are annoying, but they’re even more annoying when they’re intended for a different person. The complaint for this class action claims that Comenity Bank repeatedly placed wrong-number calls to consumer cell phones, looking for different parties than the one called.

Cell Phone with Strike-Through

This settlement resolves a class action that alleges that NPAS Solutions violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) by placing wrong-number calls to consumer cell phones using an automatic dialing system. 

IC System Logo

IC System, Inc. has agreed to pay more than $3 million to resolve a class action alleging that it placed calls to consumer cell phones in violation of the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act. Some of the persons called were called more than once, even after being identified and coded as a wrong number. 

Robotic Hand Holding Receiver

Plaintiff Ramon Tovar had not give his consent to calls from Bill Me Later, Inc. when he began receiving them in 2017. The company called a number of times, including on March 24, 28, 29, and 30, in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. To make it even worse, the calls were not for him, but for a woman he did not know. The pre-recorded voice on the line told him that if he was not the person named, he should hang up. He did, but that didn’t stop the calls. Tovar has no prior relationship with the company and had not given his prior written consent to call him on his cell phone

Image of Refusing Call

This settlement resolves a consolidation of three cases all filed within a thirty-day period. The complaint for this class action alleges that Collecto, Inc. called cell phones using and automated dialing system in an attempt to collect debts.

Discover Logo

Plaintiff Rachel Gingerich claims that Discover repeatedly called her cell phone using an automatic dialer and/or an artificial or prerecorded voice, despite the fact that she put herself on their Do Not Call list, did not have an account or debt with them, and told them that she was not the person they were looking for. However, the complaint says, Discover continued to call her two or three times a day for a period of time.

Pages