In Mavris v. RSI Enterprises, plaintiff filed a putative class action alleging that defendant’s collection letters violated the FDCPA in two ways: first, the initial letter allegedly failed to contain a proper validation notice because the letter instructed the debtor to send any correspondence to the creditor and by demanding payment within 30 days of the validation notice being sent.  Second, plaintiff alleged a subsequent letter violated the FDCPA by stating that the account would be sent to a  “third party collections company” if not paid, allegedly misrepresenting that the account had not already been placed with a debt collector.  Defendant moved for summary judgment, arguing it was not a debt collector because the debt was not in default at the time it was acquitted.  The court denied the motion, finding that though the term default had not been defined by the underlying contract, and therefore that there was a disputed factual issue on when the debt went into default.

► Back to News & Resources