Troutman Sanders

JANUARY 11, 2021

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.

Accrued Interest 52

Accrued Interest Judgment Fair Debt Collection Law Firms 52

FDCPA Defense

AUGUST 22, 2016

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

Debtor Debt collector Law Firms Accrued Interest 40

Consumer Financial Services Law

JANUARY 3, 2018

By Zachary Dunn The FDCPA prohibits a debt collector from using “any false, deceptive, or misleading representation” in connection with the collection of a debt. Though all statements in ARS’ letter were factually correct – including the statement that Islam’s debt was $14,413.78 See 15 U.S.C. In Islam v.

Accrued Interest 40

Accrued Interest Debt collector Banks Creditors 40

FDCPA Defense

FEBRUARY 1, 2018

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. 2017) was subject to the FDCPA, because it was not sent solely to enforce a security interest.

Accrued Interest 40

Accrued Interest Foreclosure Debt collector Debtor 40