The Seventh Circuit in O’Boyle v. Real Time Resolutions, Inc., 910 F.3d 338, 341–48 (7th Cir. Dec. 7, 2018) affirmed a Wisconsin district court’s ruling that a letter which stated that important information was on the back of its first page, but the required validation notice was actually on the…
Read More »In Skibbe v. U.S. Bank, et al. No. 16 C 192 (N.D. Ill. Feb. 15, 2018), the United State District Court for the Northern District of Illinois District granted summary judgment to a mortgagee and the firm retained to handle a state court foreclosure on an FDCPA claim which asserted…
Read More »In Naranjo v. The Cherrington Firm, LLC, 2-17-cv-00645 (Jan. 22, 2018) the United State District Court for the District of Utah found in favor of the consumer that his Utah Consumer Sales Protection Act (“UCSPA”) claim was not barred by the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”). In Naranjo, the…
Read More »A federal appeals court in Texas confirmed in Clark v. Deutsche Bank Nat’l Tr. Co. for Morgan Stanley ABS Capital I, Inc., Tr. 2006-HE3, No. 16-11806 (5th Cir. Jan. 22, 2018) that communications made in connection with a loan modification agreement doo not relate to the collection of a debt…
Read More »In Boucher v. Financial System of Green Bay, Inc., No. 17-2308 (7th Cir. Jan. 17, 2018), the plaintiff-debtor sued a debt collector under the FDCPA alleging that debtor’s dunning letters were false and misleading because they threatened to impose “late charges and other charges” that could not lawfully be imposed…
Read More »In Wolter v. Anselmo Lindberg Oliver, LLC, No. 16 C 4205 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 4, 2017) the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois held that a debtor did not suffer a an “informational injury” sufficient to establish standing where she did not seek to compel the debt…
Read More »A consumer in a state court collection action brought suit under the FDCPA contending that the debt collector’s response to the consumer’s motion to dismiss the state court case constituted a communication in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e. The district court held that the response was a “formal pleading”…
Read More »The issue in *Oliva v Blatt, Hasenmiller, Leibsker & Moore*, No. 15-2516 (7th Cir. July 24, 2017) (en banc) was whether a debt collector who violated the venue provision of the FDCPA can avoid liability on the ground that it was relying on controlling circuit precedent interpreting the statute when…
Read More »The Supreme Court in Henson v. Santander Consumer USA Inc., No. 16-349 (June 12, 2017) resolved a conflict among various circuits as to whether a person who buys debt is a “debt collector” under the FDCPA. The Court sided with the Fourth Circuit in holding that by buying debt that…
Read More »A debt collector who files a time-barred proof of claim is not engaging in false or deceptive conduct as defined by the FDCPA, according to a recent decision by the US Supreme Court. In Midland Funding, LLC v. Johnson, 16-348, (May 15, 2017) the debtor filed a Chapter 13 Bankruptcy…
Read More »