Second Circuit Rejects Alleged Duty to Itemize in an FDCPA validation Notice

In the latest decision on the adequacy of validation notices the Second Circuit Court of Appeals has rejected a plaintiff’s Argument that an FDCPA validation notice must itemize the component elements of the debt.  The court of appeals held that “a debt collection letter that informs the consumer of the total, present quantity of his…

Read More

A Catch-22 for Foreclosure Lawyers?

Foreclosure attorneys struggle to find an appropriate way to comply with the FDCPA’s requirement that a validation notice correctly state the amount of the debt in cases in which the balance is changing constantly due to a variety of factors.  In Carlin v. Davidson Fink LLP, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 5438 (7th Cir. Mar. 29,…

Read More

Second Circuit Holds that Letter Need Not Reference Nonexistent Interest

The U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals has issued its decision in Taylor v. Fin. Recovery Services, Inc., affirming that a debt collector’s letters did not violate the FDCPA by failing to state affirmatively that interest was not accruing. Taylor sued FRS asserting that it violated the FDCPA because its initial collection letter stated the…

Read More

Collecting for a Creditor vs. Collecting for a Debt Collector?

Section 1692g of the FDCPA requires that “within five days after the initial communication with a consumer in connection with the collection of any debt, a debt collector shall . . . send the consumer a written notice” of the consumer’s validation rights.  But how many such notices are required? Must each successive debt collector…

Read More

What’s In A Name?

On November 1, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals declined to elevate form over substance, affirming a ruling from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida dismissing a consumer’s FDCPA claim that a law firm’s collection letter failed to identify accurately the name of the creditor to whom the debt was…

Read More