Jump to content

Double Dip When State Law Mirrors FDCPA


Recommended Posts

In my state we have the Ark. Fair Debt Collections Practice Act. It reads word for word the same as the FDCPA, including damages.

Is there anything stopping the court from granting up to 1K under the FDCPA and up to 1K under the ARK Fair Debt Collections Practice Act?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking from CA, one could be awarded damages

under both the FDCPA and the Rosenthal FDCPA.

I've simply found nothing that would keep me from collecting on both ends. It's like in criminal court, you can be tried on state charges and then turn around and be tried on the very same crime if it violates a federal law, and there is no double jeopardy.

I know this is civil, but seems like the same concept to me. The very same action can violate two completely different statutes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here it is called double recovery, but it isn't clear whether or not it applies to claims in two different levels of court. The plaintiff would certainly balk, claiming that you want damages twice arising from the same set of circumstances. They may plead federal preemption. You're opening a whole new can of worms. Like George Clooney said in The Perfect Storm, Let's go fishing!

"double recovery" - Google Scholar

For the new screwed up Goodle Scolar, look for this page and choose the olde venerable version.

Google Scholar

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like George Clooney said in The Perfect Storm, Let's go fishing!

Good enough, I'm grabbing my fishing pole and Monday morning going fishing at the Federal Courthouse.

I'll be an absolute joy to work with and in no way turn this into anything complicated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd say file and let them argue against it if they can. I didn't look at the double recovery case law I googled you, but that should tell you where you are. I know where they are, they are in a boat in the middle of a lake and there is a big hole in the boat. Looks like Fredo going for his last fishing trip with Michael's hit man. It would be interesting to see if state law (double recovery) can apply to two different venues. We can make the argument that it does not. You might want to get into separation of powers, Constitutional versus state, now Coltfan, are you qualified to handle this? LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the only way you can argue constitutional law is to prove that the law harms not just you but a very good amount of the population also.

The case of Marbury-vs-Madison can be read as giving the judiciary power of judicial review or as giving the judiciary the ultimate power to interpret the Constitution. Although many have argued that other branches also have the power and duty to interpret the Constitution, the Court increasingly contends that it has the ultimate power to do so.

Judges, lawyers and scholars use several types of constitutional argument to analyze and interpret the Constitution.

a. The constitutional text

b. Historical argument

i. Intent of the framers; originalism

But the framers’ intent is often not clear.

Why should it bind us centuries later?

ii. Ongoing history

iii. Judicial doctrine

c. Structural argument

d. Value arguments

e. Prudential/pragmatic arguments

Mootness

Mootness deals with cases that no longer present a live Art. III case or controversy. At times, however, courts will hear such cases that are “capable of repetition yet evading review” because otherwise such cases would escape judicial review.

Ripeness

Ripeness conveys the requirement that a dispute must have reached a point where the challenged governmental action has a direct adverse impact on the individual making the challenge. Self-executing acts are ripe once enacted; those that require some further action before a legal consequence attaches may be more controversial. At times, courts have held that such laws are not ripe until the further action has occurred.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the only way you can argue constitutional law is to prove that the law harms not just you but a very good amount of the population also.

Well then I will humbly bow out, as I simply can't argue Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and/or the Arkansas Fair Debt Collection Practices Act harms me or a good amount of the population.

I've been beat, I lose, I will admit it. I'll just have to move forward with both claims then. :mrgreen:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Federal Preemption would only apply if there was a conflict of law, not when they are harmonious. When I was in Washington I won awards under the FDCPA, WACAA, TCPA and the WA form of TCPA against one CA. :)

File it and if there is a way to wiggle out they will try, but I bet you will be able to find just as many points to crush their argument. Worst that will ever happen is you will have to drop some counts, but will still have others to fall back to. I always try to push the envelope and it seems the harder I push the faster they want to settle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the only way you can argue constitutional law is to prove that the law harms not just you but a very good amount of the population also.

Gunny, your post are always so informative. This quote needs clarified. The Constituitonal law (or a new law or unchallenged law) itself applied to all as a Constituional Law, you may have a point, but a violation of your right given to you by the Constitution can be applied individually and by each act of violation. E.g. such as a right to due process of law or equal protection under the law. Which either can arise to violation of your Constituitional right.

Edited by debtfighter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • 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.