A Magistrate Court judge in Illinois has denied competing summary judgment motions in a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act case, ruling the plaintiff failed to follow proper procedure and that the defendant is not entitled to the FDCPA’s bona fide error defense that it initiated collection activity on a debt that had been discharged in bankruptcy because some of the alleged infractions occurred after the defendant of bankruptcy.
The Background: The plaintiff incurred a medical debt and subsequently filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy, bit did not list the debt in question on her petition. The bankruptcy was discharged.
- The creditor assigned the debt to the defendant for collection. The defendant initiated a collection lawsuit against the plaintiff. The plaintiff’s husband contacted the defendant and informed the attorney that the plaintiff had filed and completed a Chapter 7 bankruptcy.
- Six weeks later, the collection lawsuit was dismissed.
- In the interim, the plaintiff filed this suit, accusing the defendant of violating the FDCPA.
The Ruling: After ruling that the plaintiff’s summary judgment motion should be denied because she violated a local rule by forgetting to file a separate statement of material facts, Judge Jeffrey T. Gilbert of the District Court for the Northern District of Illinois went to work on the defendant’s motion.
- The defendant is not entitled to the bona fide error defense because the plaintiff’s claims are based on the six-week gap between being notified of the bankruptcy and dismissing the collection lawsuit, as well as allegedly telling the plaintiff’s husband that the defendant was not going to dismiss its lawsuit.
