Jump to content

Do CA Atty's have to include the FDCPA in their collections letter?


Recommended Posts

I was just wondering if the Rosenthal FDCPA has to be included when an atty sends a collections letter? The atty letter I received did not include this like the collections letters I have received. Would this be a violation? I did send a DV letter to him over a mth ago. No response yet. Is there a time limit on DV responding in CA?

TIA!! :p

Edited by VLDCA
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's no time limit to answering a DV...with that being the case, I give them no more than 30 days before sending a letter letting them know they failed to validate and to cease collection efforts...

It's been good for getting 1 or 2 violations out of a CA...

You're 'always' Awesome!!!! Thank You!! xangelx

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe he does need to mention Rosenthal...I think you've got a violation of Rosenthal right there...

I've been reading up & I believe he does have to include this w/ his letter. All the collections letter I receive in the mail contain this. hmmmmm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I found this:

1788. This title may be cited as the Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection

Practices Act.

1788.2. (a) Definitions and rules of construction set forth in this

section are applicable for the purpose of this title.

© The term "debt collector" means any person who, in the

ordinary course of business, regularly, on behalf of himself or

herself or others, engages in debt collection. The term includes any

person who composes and sells, or offers to compose and sell, forms,

letters, and other collection media used or intended to be used for

debt collection, but does not include an attorney or counselor at


If Rosenthal doesn't define attorneys as debt collectors and doesn't apply to attorneys, perhaps that's why he didn't include it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the letter was a first dunning, the FDCPA 30 day language and the Rosenthal language both are required.

Debt collection Attorneys are liable to the FDCPA in CA.

Attorneys do have to abide by the Rosenthal Act as it's referenced in the Section 6077.5, but you don't have a private right of action to collect if they violate. The attorney would be disciplined by the State Bar of California if you file a complaint and the bar finds that they violated.

California Business and Professions Code Section 6077.5 - California Attorney Resources - California Laws

Read through this publication for more detailed information:

Fair Debt collection Practices Statues: Legal Guide DC-2 - California Department Of Consumer Affairs

This is a link to file a complaint against the attorney for a violation:

Lawyer Regulation

PM me the Law Firm you're dealing with if you like, I may be able to help. Good luck!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On July 9 1986 President Reagan Signed house bill (Pub. L. 99-3610) into law. this law appealed section 803(6) which defines a debt collector.

Section 803(6) defines "debt collector" as a party "who uses any instrumentality of interstate commerce or the mails in . . . collection of . . . debts owed . . . another."

1. Examples. The term includes:

Employees of a debt collection business, including a corporation, partnership, or other entity whose business is the collection of debts owed another.

A firm that regularly collects overdue rent on behalf of real estate owners, or periodic assessments on behalf of condominium associations, because it "regularly collects . . . debts owed or due another."

A party based in the United States who collects debts owed by consumers residing outside the United States, because he "uses . . . the mails" in the collection business. The residence of the debtor is irrelevant.

A firm that collects debts in its own name for a creditor solely by mechanical techniques, such as (1) placing phone calls with pre-recorded messages and recording consumer responses, or (2) making computer-generated mailings.

An attorney or law firm whose efforts to collect consumer debts on behalf of its clients regularly include activities traditionally associated with debt collection, such as sending demand letters (dunning notices) or making collection telephone calls to the consumer. However, an attorney is not considered to be a debt collector simply because he responds to an inquiry from the consumer following the filing of a lawsuit.

2. Exclusions. The term does not include:

Any person who collects debts (or attempts to do so) only in isolated instances, because the definition includes only those who "regularly" collect debts.

A credit card issuer that collects its cardholder's account, even when the account is based upon purchases from participating merchants, because the issuer is collecting its own debts, not those "owed or due another."

An attorney whose practice is limited to legal activities (e.g., the filing and prosecution of lawsuits to reduce debts to judgment).

3. Application of definition to creditor using another name. Creditors are generally excluded from the definition of "debt collector" to the extent that they collect their own debts in their own name. However, the term specifically applies to "any creditor who, in the process of collecting his own debts, uses any name other than his own which would indicate that a third person is" involved in the collection.

A creditor is a debt collector for purposes of this act if:

He uses a name other than his own to collect his debts, including a fictitious name.

His salaried attorney employees who collect debts use stationery that indicates that attorneys are employed by someone other than the creditor or are independent or separate from the creditor (e.g., ABC Corp. sends collection letters on stationery of "John Jones, Attorney-at-Law").

He regularly collects debts for another creditor; however, he is a debt collector only for purposes of collecting these debts, not when he collects his own debt in his own name.

The creditor's collection division or related corporate collector is not clearly designated as being affiliated with the creditor; however, the creditor is not a debt collector if the creditor's correspondence is clearly labeled as being from the "collection unit of the (creditor's name)," since the creditor is not using a "name other than his own" in that instance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.