Remove Accrued Interest Remove Debt collector Remove Judgment Remove Law Firms
article thumbnail

7th Circuit Challenges Whether Plaintiffs Had Standing in Recent District Court Cases

Troutman Sanders

With these holdings, the Seventh Circuit stated that simply alleging a procedural violation, confusion, or annoyance under the FDCPA does not constitute an injury-in-fact and that plaintiffs need to show real harm resulting from their responses to debt collectors’ actions to have Article III standing in federal court. In Bazile v.

article thumbnail

The “Least Sophisticated Debtor” Is Getting More Sophisticated, And Has An Improved Memory Too

FDCPA Defense

Hollins Law Firm , _F.3d There, the collection law firm defendant communicated with plaintiff on a number of occasions, and each time the firm identified itself as a “debt collector,” as required by section 1692e(11) of the FDCPA. Thank You,” without specifically reciting he was a “debt collector.”

Debtor 40
article thumbnail

Emerging Trends In FDCPA Litigation Against Community Association Attorneys

FDCPA Defense

Duty to disclose accruing interest, fees or other charges A significant recent trend in FDCPA case law involves courts that have imposed new disclosure obligations that are not found in the plain language of the Act. California law does not allow for a deficiency judgment following non-judicial foreclosure.