- Posts by Katherine West
AssociateKatherine West is an Associate in the Birmingham office where she practices in the firm's Financial Services Litigation group.
Katherine earned her Juris Doctor from Vanderbilt University Law School, where she served as an ...
On January 11, 2023, the Third Circuit held that attempting to collect on a default judgment did not constitute using "'false, deceptive, or misleading' representations in connection with collecting the judgment" if the default judgment was later vacated. Lowe v. FBCS, Inc., No. 21-3307, 2023 WL 154970, at *1 (3rd Cir. Jan. 11, 2023).
Barbara Lowe (Lowe) filed a lawsuit claiming FBCS, Inc. (FBCS) and LVNV Funding, LLC (LVNV) (collectively, Defendants) violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) by calling her to collect on a default judgment later vacated and declared ...
In Beal v. Outfield Brew House, LLC, --- F.4th ---, 2022 WL 868697 (8th Cir. Mar. 24, 2022), the Eighth Circuit considered whether an automated marketing system that was used to send promotional text messages to randomly selected phone numbers qualified as an ATDS within the purview of the TCPA. See id. at *1. The Eighth Circuit concluded that the automated marketing system did not "produce" telephone numbers to be called and, therefore, did not qualify as an ATDS. See id.
The case arose because the Appellants received promotional text messages from Outfield Brew House, LLC and/or ...
On November 30, 2021, the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection's ("CFPB") October and December 2020 Final Rules take effect. Among other things, the October and December 2020 Final Rules address communications with consumers under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ("FDCPA"). Created in 1977, the FDCPA was intended to "eliminate abusive debt collection practices by debt collectors, to insure that those debt collectors who refrain from using abusive debt collection practices are not competitively disadvantaged, and to promote consistent state action to protect ...
On June 25, 2021, in a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court held that the individual members of a class "must demonstrate, among other things, that they suffered a concrete harm" in order to have Article III standing to recover individual damages in a class action. [1]
In TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, --- S. Ct. ----, 2021 WL 2599472 (2021), a certified class of over 8,000 people alleged TransUnion LLC ("TransUnion") violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act ("FCRA") by failing to use reasonable procedures to ensure the accuracy of its credit files. [2] The allegations arose after TransUnion ...
On April 13, 2020, the District Court of Kansas in Hampton v. Barclays Bank Delaware, No. 18-4071-DDC-ADM, 2020 WL 4698476 (D. Kan. Aug. 13, 2020), joined the Seventh and Eleventh Circuits in holding that devices that exclusively dial numbers stored in a customer database do not qualify as autodialers under the TCPA.
The Plaintiff, Anthony Hampton ("Plaintiff"), asserted numerous claims against multiple defendants, including a TCPA claim against Marketplace Loan Grantor Trust, Series 2016-LD1's ("Marketplace"). Specifically, Plaintiff claimed Marketplace violated the ...
On Monday, April 13, 2020, the Attorneys General of 25 States submitted a letter to the U.S. Department of Treasury urging Secretary Mnuchin to take action to ensure that relief payments issued to consumers pursuant to the CARES Act will be exempt from garnishment by creditors and debt collectors. The letter states that, “in what appears to be a legislative oversight,” the $1,200 stimulus checks payable under the Act to those adults with income under $75,000 are not explicitly designated as exempt from garnishment like other federal benefits such as disability and veterans’ ...
On April 7, 2020, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the National Credit Union Administration, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, in consultation with state financial regulators (hereinafter the "agencies") issued a revised interagency statement regarding loan modifications and reporting for borrowers affected by COVID-19. The revised statement clarifies the relationship between the March 22, 2020 interagency statement and section 4013 of the ...
On April 1, 2020, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ("CFPB") released a policy statement providing guidance on credit reporting companies' and furnishers' responsibilities during COVID-19. The CFPB's policy statement encourages lenders to voluntarily provide relief and to accurately report any relief to credit bureaus. The policy statement further indicates furnishers should comply with the CARES Act, which, with certain exceptions, requires lenders to report accounts as current if consumers have sought relief from their lenders due to the pandemic, or, if an ...
In Swann v. Dynamic Recovery Solutions, LLC, No. 4:18-CV-1000-VEH, 2018 WL 6198997 (N.D. Ala. Nov. 28, 2018), the Northern District of Alabama dismissed a putative class action case alleging a letter seeking to collect a time-barred debt violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ("FDCPA").
The plaintiff, Susan Swann ("Plaintiff"), alleged that defendants Dynamic Recovery Services, LLC ("DRS") and Jefferson Capital Systems, LLC ("JCS") violated § 1692e and §1692f of the FDCPA. See generally id. Section 1692e prohibits debt collectors from "'us[ing] any false deceptive ...
In Roark v. Credit One Bank, N.A., No. 16-173 (PAM/ECW), 2018 WL 5921652 (D. Minn. Nov. 13, 2018), the District Court of Minnesota found that calls to a reassigned phone number did not violate the TCPA because the caller's reliance on the prior owner's express consent was reasonable.
The plaintiff, Stewart Roark ("Plaintiff"), alleged Credit One Bank, N.A. ("Credit One") violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act ("TCPA") by using an automatic dialer ("ATDS") to call his cell phone number and left a prerecorded voicemail on his phone without his consent. See generally id.
In Gonzalez v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, No. 5:18-cv-340-Oc-30PRL, 2018 WL 4217065 (M.D. Fla. Sept. 5, 2018), the Middle District of Florida determined that the D.C. Circuit's opinion in ACA International v. FCC, 885 F.3d 687 (D.C. Cir. 2018) [hereinafter "ACA"], vacated the Federal Communications Commission's ("FCC") 2003, 2008, and 2015 Orders interpreting the definition of an automatic telephone dialing system ("ATDS").
The plaintiff, Wilfredo Gonzalez ("Plaintiff"), alleged that Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC ("Ocwen") used an ATDS to place approximately 500 calls to his ...
In Washington v. Six Continents Hotels, Inc., No. 2:16-CV-03719-ODW-JEM, 2018 WL 4092024 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 24, 2018), the Central District of California found that ACA International v. FCC, 885 F.3d 687 (D.C. Cir. 2018) [hereinafter ACA], set aside all prior FCC guidance regarding the definition of an autodialer.
The plaintiff, Eric Washington ("Plaintiff"), alleged that Six Continents Hotels, Inc. ("Six Continents") sent him numerous unsolicited text messages using an automatic telephone dialing system ("ATDS") in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act ...
In Keyes v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, No. 17-cv-11492, 2018 WL 3914707 (E.D. Mich. Aug. 16, 2018), the Eastern District of Michigan determined that the system Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC ("Ocwen") used to place calls, the Aspect Unified IP ("Aspect System"), was not an automatic telephone dialing system ("ATDS") within the meaning of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act ("TCPA").
Plaintiff Darcel Keyes ("Plaintiff") claimed Ocwen violated the TCPA by using its Aspect System to call her, despite her objections. See id. at *1. To support her claims, Plaintiff relied on an expert ...
In Harris v. Navient Solutions, LLC, No. 3:15-cv-564 (RNC), 2018 WL 3748155 (D. Conn. Aug. 7, 2018), the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut followed the Second Circuit's decision in Reyes v. Lincoln Auto. Fin. Servs., 861 F.3d 51, 56 (2d Cir. 2017), which held that the TCPA did not permit unilateral revocation of consent to calls that was part of a bargained-for exchange. See Reyes, 861 F.3d at 56.
The plaintiff, Jennifer Harris ("Plaintiff"), alleged Navient Solutions ("Navient") violated the TCPA by using an automatic telephone dialing system ("ATDS") to ...
The Northern District of Alabama recently followed the Second Circuit's holding in Reyes v. Lincoln Automotive Financial Services, 861 F.3d 51 (2d Cir. 2017), and held that consent provided in a contract as part of a bargained-for exchange could not be unilaterally revoked under the TCPA. With this holding, the Northern District of Alabama becomes the first court in the Eleventh Circuit to follow Reyes.
In Few v. Receivables Performance Management, No. 1:17-CV-2038-KOB, 2018 WL 3772863 (N.D. Ala. Aug. 9, 2018), Plaintiff alleged that Defendant violated the TCPA by calling and ...
In Barton v. Credit One Financial d/b/a Credit One Bank, No. 16CV2652, 2018 WL 2012876, (N.D. Ohio April 30, 2018), the Northern District of Ohio followed the Second Circuit's decision in Reyes v. Lincoln Automotive Financial Services, 861 F.3d 51 (2d Cir. 2017), and held that a plaintiff who consented to receiving telephone calls as part of a credit card application could not unilaterally revoke that consent.
The plaintiff, Carlton Barton, Jr. ("Plaintiff"), filed a lawsuit claiming that Credit One Financial d/b/a Credit One Bank ("Credit One") violated the Telephone Consumer ...
In Edelsberg v. Vroom, Inc., No. 16-cv-62734-GAYLES, 2018 WL 1509135 (S.D. Fla. Mar. 27, 2018), the Southern District of Florida held that an advertisement directing interested persons to contact a number provided in the advertisement constituted prior express consent under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act ("TCPA").
The plaintiff, Mark Edelsberg ("Plaintiff"), posted a classified advertisement for the sale of a vehicle on Craigslist. The advertisement included the price and information about the vehicle and stated "Call XXX-XXX-6445 for more info . . . do NOT contact me ...
In Ferrer v. Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC, No. 15-20877-Civ-Scola, 2018 WL 582584 (S.D. Fla. Jan. 26, 2018), the Southern District of Florida determined that a telephone dialing system that was incapable of predictively dialing, storing, or independently producing telephone numbers and could not place a call without human input was not an automatic telephone dialing system ("ATDS") within the meaning of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act ("TCPA").
Plaintiff Maria Ferrer ("Plaintiff") filed suit against Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC and other defendants ("Bayview ...
In Kristensen v. Credit Payment Services, Inc., --- F.3d ---, 2018 WL 343758 (9th Cir. 2018), the Ninth Circuit recently held that three lenders and two marketing companies could not be vicariously liable under the TCPA for text messages sent in connection with marketing campaigns.
Plaintiff Flemming Kristensen received a text message containing a link to apply for a loan. The text was generated in connection with a marketing campaign undertaken by three lenders, Enova International, Inc., Pioneer Financial Services, Inc., and Credit Payment Services, Inc. Each lender entered ...
In Latner v. Mt. Sinai Health System, Inc., ___ F.3d ___, 2018 WL 265085 (2d Cir. 2018), the Second Circuit recently held that a single flu shot reminder text does not violate the TCPA when a patient gives prior express consent to be contacted.
David Latner ("Latner") filed a putative class action against Mt. Sinai Health System, Inc. ("Mt. Sinai") and West Park Medical Group, P.C. ("WPMG") alleging that defendants violated § 227(b)(1)(A)(iii) of the TCPA by sending him a single flu shot reminder text. Defendants moved for judgment on the pleadings, and the district court granted their ...
In Breda v. Cellco Partnership, No. 16-11512-DJC, 2017 WL 5586661 (D. Ma. Nov. 17, 2017), the plaintiff, Robin Breda ("Plaintiff") claimed Cellco Partnership ("Cellco") violated § 227(b)(1) of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act ("TCPA") by calling her cell phone number with recorded messages regarding another person's Verizon account. Under § 227(b)(1)(A)(iii) of the TCPA, calls "to any telephone number assigned to a paging service, cellular telephone service, . . . or any service for which the called party is charged for the call" made using an automatic telephone dialing ...
On October 20, 2017, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals denied a petition for panel rehearing, or in the alternative, for rehearing en banc of its decision in Reyes v. Lincoln Automotive Financial Services, 861 F. 3d 51 (2d Cir. 2017). By denying the petition for rehearing, the Second Circuit implicitly affirmed its holding that the TCPA does not permit a party to a bilateral contract to unilaterally revoke a contractual provision in which the party consented to receive calls.
In the underlying appeal, the plaintiff, Alberto Reyes, Jr. ("Reyes"), argued that the defendant, Lincoln ...
In Kuntz v. Rodenburg LLP, No. 15-2777, - F.3d -, 2016 WL 5219884 (8th Cir. Sept. 22, 2016), the Eighth Circuit held that a law firm hired to collect a debt did not violate § 1692b(3) of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ("FDCPA") when it made multiple calls to a third party to obtain information about the debtor.[1] Section 1692b(3) prohibits debt collectors from communicating more than once with a person other than the debtor ("third party") in order to obtain information about the debtor's location unless the third party requests to be contacted or the debt collector "reasonably ...
In Marquez v. Weinstein, Pinson & Riley, P.S., No. 15-3273, - F.3d -, 2016 WL 4651403 (7th Cir. Sept. 7, 2016), the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that a validation notice in a complaint to collect a debt violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ("FDCPA"). The ruling interpreted § 1692e of the FDCPA, which prohibits debt collectors from using "any false, deceptive, or misleading representations or means in connection with the collection of any debt." 15 U.S.C. § 1692e. The Seventh Circuit found that the validation notice violated § 1692e because the validation notice was ...
In Hernandez v. Williams, Zinman & Parham PC, No. 14-15672, -- F.3d --, 2016 WL 3913445 (9th Cir. July 20, 2016), the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that each subsequent debt collector is required to send a § 1692g(a) validation notice within five days of its initial communication with a consumer, even if the validation notice has been previously provided to the debtor by another debt collector for the subject debt. The Ninth Circuit's ruling is the first published opinion by a federal court of appeals addressing this issue.[1]
The ruling interpreted section 1692g(a) of the Fair ...