Chancy949 Posted November 27, 2004 Report Share Posted November 27, 2004 . A lawyer who mailed collection letters without individually reviewing the files first, must pay over $104,000.00 in damages in a class action under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ruled the U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit. The FDCPA prohibits debt collectors from making "a false representation or implication that any individual is an attorney or that any communication is from an attorney". The court ruled that the attorney's noninvolvement violated the act because it was as though the letter had not come from an attorney at all. (# 10219 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c m chase Posted November 27, 2004 Report Share Posted November 27, 2004 Hmmmm...mght have to check into that.Midland's lawfirm has sent all kinds of crap...and I have proof they never saw the files. They sent me a letter "our client is ordering the files right now...we'll send you a copy when we get one". :shock: Chancy, your posts seem to make my case stronger and stronger! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Mcgrath Posted November 29, 2004 Report Share Posted November 29, 2004 Im confused...whatd they do? And I think I know the Attorney that handled the Class Action suit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c m chase Posted November 29, 2004 Report Share Posted November 29, 2004 Im confused...whatd they do?.Who? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calawyer Posted November 29, 2004 Report Share Posted November 29, 2004 If you have a cite to the decision, it would be helpful.I am aware of an older case where a law firm served as a "front" for a non-lawyer collection firm. Non lawyers prepared all the letters and sent them out under the law firm's letterhead because letters from lawyers get more attention. As I recall, the Court found the letters to be deceptive because, among other reasons, the letter gave the impression that a lawyer had reviewd the file and had concluded that the debt was legally owing when no such review occurred. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xanathos Posted November 29, 2004 Report Share Posted November 29, 2004 I saw this case that Chancy is talking about not too long ago. Ima gonna dig it up. I know it's laying around here somewhere, struck me as an interesting read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calawyer Posted December 1, 2004 Report Share Posted December 1, 2004 I looked up the case I was thinking about and it is probably the case Chancy mentioned ($84K plus $20K equal $104K in damages). It is eight years old but an interesting case anyway. The following is a quote from the case and a cite:The undisputed facts in our case establish that Rubin has no real involvement in the mailing of dunning letters to debtors. Like the attorney in Clomon, he has a cozy relationship with the "referring" collection agency. Rubin is not personally or directly involved in deciding when or to whom a dunning letter should be sent. There is no true "judgment" being rendered here by a real attorney. Like the attorney in Clomon, Rubin did not review the debtor's file; he did not determine when particular letters should be sent; he did not approve the sending of particular letters based upon the recommendation of others; he did not see particular letters before they were sent; and he did not even know the identities of the debtors to whom the letters were sent. Instead, Rubin said at his deposition that letters are only brought to his attention for advice and guidance when there is "some unusual problem or something different [or] out of the ordinary comes up." Given these undisputed facts, Judge Conlon in the district court correctly concluded that Rubin violated sec. 1692e(3) and (9) because his collection letters create the false and misleading impression that the communications were from an attorney when, in fact, they were not really "from" an attorney in any meaningful sense of the word. http://laws.lp.findlaw.com/7th/952881.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chancy949 Posted December 1, 2004 Author Report Share Posted December 1, 2004 Check the post mark on the envelope. If it is a difference zip code than on the letterhead....... the post mark is the same as the CA ... but not the law firm it wasn't mailed from the law office (or the post office near the office) they will do bulk mailing and drop it off at the post office. It would be an indication if they were breaking the law. The CA and the Law firm working in tandum and the firm not review the cases. Just an idea, would be interesting to see a trend........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c m chase Posted December 1, 2004 Report Share Posted December 1, 2004 Good catch, Chancy. I don't know if I could use this in my case now that I read it more...darn.I think MY personal collection agency lawfirm just acts as an assigned CA. They try to collect (in my case for almost a year) and then if they can't, they DO file suit.They have NOT seen the files...only a printout from Midland's computer. I have their letter stating that. But I still don't think that would fly in the way of being considered 'non-involved'. That's just a CA not having any proof...just like ANY CA. Shucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recovering Attorney Posted December 1, 2004 Report Share Posted December 1, 2004 Here's a recent 7th Circuit case regarding lawyer letters. The crux is on page 4, the letter itself is printed on page 6 of the pdf. Long deicsion, but good legal background, and the OC was found liable as well!!!Morale of the story. Letters from lawyers who "urge you to pay" someone else will be found violative of the law and will lead to liability on the part of the OC. http://www.bankersonline.com/lending/fdcpacase.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RacerX780 Posted December 1, 2004 Report Share Posted December 1, 2004 I read that case.. pretty interesting.I have a situation which is somewhat along the same lines, but as I read the case and looked over my dunning letter, I don't think it fits. But I wanted to see what everyone else thought.The dunning letter is for an old cell phone account they claim I owe. It is from a law office in GA. In the letter, they ask that I make the check out to the cell phone company and to mail it to a po box that is listen on the payment coupon.Lawyer signed it.What I found odd is that they would ask me to write the check out to the cell phone company.. and yet send the payment to them.Now, this isn't the first CA who has contacted me with this... and no one has been able to send anything when I send a VD letter to them.. it just gets passed along to the next person.Would this letter be along the same lines as the one in the case?? The only thing I see the OC being referred to is that payment is to be made in their name... Thoughts??-R Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recovering Attorney Posted December 1, 2004 Report Share Posted December 1, 2004 Very interesting. Does the letter qualify the lawyer's authority in any way, such as language to the effect that they are not auhtorized to sue or they are not threatening to sue or such. It could be they, like Rubin and Nelson defendants, are just sending letters. Receiving the funds is no different than fielding the complaints, they get passed along. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chancy949 Posted December 1, 2004 Author Report Share Posted December 1, 2004 I have a question for ya'll.If they can't VOD, then does than mean there is no "file"? If there is no "file" then how can the Attorney review the file? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RacerX780 Posted December 1, 2004 Report Share Posted December 1, 2004 This is exactly how the letter appears. It's on letterhead of the firm..Please be advised, as a debt collector the above stated account has been directed to this office for collection. This matter can be settled without additional costs by calling our office at xxx-xxx-xxxx. I trust and respectfully request that you take the necessary steps to bring this account to a conclusion. Make your check ofr money order payable to CELL PHONE COMPANY and mail it to the above post office box or contact this office for payment arrangements.If you dispute the outstanding balance, or any part of it, do so in writing within thiry (30) days upon receipt of this notice, now is the time to address this. Should you not dispute the outstanding balance stated above within thiry (30) days, I will assume this debt to be valid.NOTICE: Verification of the debt, a copy of the judgment, if one has been awarded, or name and address of the original creditor (if different then the current creditor) will be provided if requested in writing within 30 days. Otherwise I will assume this debt to be valid. Please govern yourself accordingly.Very truly yours,Signature of lawyer, esq. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recovering Attorney Posted December 1, 2004 Report Share Posted December 1, 2004 This lawyer has a minimal understanding of the FDCPA. In cases I have seen, the plaintiff wins where the lawyer paraphrases or dickers with the mini-Miranda warning. There is also no recitation " That this is from a debt collector and any information will be used for that purpose. Since the lawyer gives you no deadline for answering, my guess is this is a simple letter service. Wait and see if he sends another. I might contact the OC ( by writing) and threaten to sue both it and the lawyer from violating the FDCPA, since it is obvious the lawyer only lending his name to the OC, thus the OC is falsely representing itself and the letter is deceptive and misleading. Remind them that could cost them actual damges, $1000 and attorney fees. Then make an offer to settle ( "without admission of any facts and solely in the spirit of compromise"), give them 20 days to respond. If you can, get a money order fo rthe amount and send a copy along with your letter. Do it by first class, certified mail. You might want to DV the lawyer within 30 days and tell him you believe his leter violates the FDCPA and you are taking steps to secure your rights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RacerX780 Posted December 1, 2004 Report Share Posted December 1, 2004 I actually got the letter several months ago.. sent a DV letter... never heard from him and no TL's have appeared on my reports.My guess is the account has been passed along to someone else, but I haven't gotten any other notices, so maybe not. -R Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts