EDITOR’S NOTE: This article is part of a series that is sponsored by WebRecon. WebRecon identifies serial plaintiffs lurking in your database BEFORE you contact them and expose yourself to a likely lawsuit. Protect your company from as many as one in three new consumer lawsuits by scrubbing your consumers through WebRecon first. Want to learn more? Call (855) WEB-RECON or email [email protected] today! Thanks to WebRecon for sponsoring this series.
DISCLAIMER: This article is based on a complaint. The defendant has not responded to the complaint to present its side of the case. The claims mentioned are accusations and should be considered as such until and unless proven otherwise.
In a case that was originally filed in state court and subsequently removed to federal court by the defendant, a collection operation is facing a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act lawsuit for allegedly requiring the plaintiff to specify the cause of a dispute, for overshadowing his validation period by demanding the plaintiff set up a payment plan during the 30-day window, and for keeping the plaintiff on the phone for more than six minutes after the plaintiff notified the defendant that he was represented by an attorney.
The Background: On April 1, the plaintiff received an email from the defendant, seeking to collect on two separate debts. The plaintiff hired an attorney advise him about the debt the defendant was trying to collect.
- On April 15, the plaintiff called the defendant to inform it that he was being represented by an attorney. The representative allegedly told the plaintiff that he had to set up a payment plan immediately. The representative also allegedly told the plaintiff that he could face litigation and garnishments on each debt.
- The representative told the plaintiff he had to pick one thing to dispute about the debt and said that the plaintiff could not dispute the debt in its entirety. “There is no such thing as everything, you have to be specific about your dispute,” the representative allegedly said, according to the complaint.
- The representative continued the call for six more minutes after being informed that the plaintiff was represented by an attorney.
- The plaintiff allegedly incurred attorney’s fees and suffered anxiety, frustration, and worry as a result of the defendant’s actions, according to the complaint.
The Claims: The complaint accuses the defendant of violating Sections 1692e, 1692g, 1692d, and 1692f of the FDCPA.
