How to know if you have a legal claim under the FDCPA

Share | The ability to obtain credit is one of the most important privileges a person living in this country can have.  The so-called "American Dream" is inextricably tied to the credit industry.  If you don't have good credit, you cannot buy a home, get decent car insurance rates, get a decent credit card, or get a loan from your local bank. 

This article is about how to know if you have a Fair Debt Collections Practices Act (FDCPA) claim when dealing with your creditors and collection agencies.  For the sake of full disclosure, only an attorney can determine whether a consumer actually has a legal claim worth pursuing in the courts. The information below is only a guideline for consumers to help them understand their rights and possibly prompt them to seek legal counsel.

Activities of all collection agencies are regulated by the Federal Trade Commission and Consumer Financial Protection Bureau through the FCRA and the FDCPA.  Original creditor actions are now regulated by a new prohibition enacted when the Dodd-Frank Act was passed called Unfair, Deceptive Acts and Practices, also known as UDAAP. UDAAP also indirectly applies to third party creditors as well according to a recent CFPB bulletin.

Below are the rules and the context within which those rules create a legal cause of action:

1. A claim by a debtor that a third party debt collector has engaged in prohibited conduct in collecting or attempting to collect a consumer debt.
2. The creditor is typically not a party.
3. The validity of the underlying debt is not relevant or an issue in the action.

 The FDCPA mandates three areas of collector compliance:
1. Identifying oneself as a debt collector.
2. Advising the debtor of the right to verify and dispute the debt.
3. Refraining from harassment, false representations and third party communications.


PRIMARY SOURCES OF THE LAWA. Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq.

Now, let's drill down to the core of what all of that means.  1. A claim by a debtor that a third party debt collector has engaged in prohibited conduct in collecting or attempting to collect a consumer debt.  The operative words of this rule are "prohibited conduct."  Prohibited conduct includes:

• Hours for phone contact: contacting consumers by telephone outside of the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. local time
• Failure to cease communication upon request: communicating with consumers in any way (other than litigation) after receiving written notice that said consumer wishes no further communication or refuses to pay the alleged debt, with certain exceptions, including advising that collection efforts are being terminated or that the collector intends to file a lawsuit or pursue other remedies where permitted
• Causing a telephone to ring or engaging any person in telephone conversation repeatedly or continuously: with intent to annoy, abuse, or harass any person at the called number.
• Communicating with consumers at their place of employment after having been advised that this is unacceptable or prohibited by the employer
• Contacting consumer known to be represented by an attorney
• Communicating with consumer after request for validation has been made: communicating with the consumer or the pursuing collection efforts by the debt collector after receipt of a consumer's written request for verification of a debt made within the 30 day validation period (or for the name and address of the original creditor on a debt) and before the debt collector mails the consumer the requested verification or original creditor's name and address
• Misrepresentation or deceit: misrepresenting the debt or using deception to collect the debt, including a debt collector's misrepresentation that he or she is an attorney or law enforcement officer
• Publishing the consumer's name or address on a "bad debt" list
• Seeking unjustified amounts, which would include demanding any amounts not permitted under an applicable contract or as provided under applicable law
• Threatening arrest or legal action that is either not permitted or not actually contemplated
• Abusive or profane language used in the course of communication related to the debt
• Communication with third parties: revealing or discussing the nature of debts with third parties (other than the consumer's spouse or attorney) (Collection agencies are allowed to contact neighbors or co-workers but only to obtain location information; disreputable agencies often harass debtors with a "block party" or "office party" where they contact multiple neighbors or co-workers telling them they need to reach the debtor on an urgent matter.)
• Contact by embarrassing media, such as communicating with a consumer regarding a debt by post card, or using any language or symbol, other than the debt collector’s address, on any envelope when communicating with a consumer by use of the mails or by telegram, except that a debt collector may use his business name if such name does not indicate that he is in the debt collection business
• Reporting false information on a consumer's credit report or threatening to do so in the process of collection

In such cases, the original creditor is NOT a party in this action, has sold the debt to the collector and cannot be listed on the legal Complaint as such.  As for whether a consumer actually owes the money to the collector, it is not an issue that can be legitimately presented in court by the collector.  The legal issue is the conduct by which the collector exercised their right to collect the debt from the consumer.  If any of the three mandates I mentioned of above have been violated by the collector, a consumer has a possible legal claim. 

If you are serious about pursuing a lawsuit against a collector you must know how things work in the legal system.  First, you must have some kind of proof of an actual violation.  The truth is that some claims will require more clear proof than other types of claims.  For example, If a collector "publishes" a debt list and your name is on it in black and white - you have clear and compelling claim if you can produce the publicized list in court.  However, you may not have a claim if your lawsuit alleges that a collector called you on two separate occasions at times after the mandated 9:00 PM limit.  Even though they did break the law, it simply does not rise to the level of a legal claim because it is not egregious enough to warrant the courts' time and resources in comparison to other claims that clearly should be heard by the court.

If you receive a dunning letter (collection letter) and it does not advise you of your right to verify and dispute the debt, you may have a claim.  Don't just take it for granted that a business is always doing what it is supposed to do.  23,000 FDCPA lawsuits last year is proof that they are not. So carefully look over any communication you receive from a collector.  It's safer for you to assume there might be an error on that document than to assume there isn't.