In Johnson v. USAA Federal Savings Bank, plaintiff alleged that defendant violated the TCPA by calling his cell phone attempting to collect his past due credit card debt. Defendant moved for summary judgment, arguing that plaintiff had consented to the calls by providing the cell phone number on his online profile, and that the service terms and conditions entitled defendant to call plaintiff. The court granted the motion, finding that plaintiff had consented to the calls by listing the cell number with the defendant, and by failing to effectively revoke that consent simply by asking that defendant stop calling him while talking on his home phone, because he continued to list the number on his online profile.
In Goins v. Metlife Home Loans, plaintiff alleged that defendant violated the FDCPA by attempting to collect a mortgage debt owed by plaintiff’s deceased father and by seeking a personal judgment against her when plaintiff was only the estate representative. Defendant moved to dismiss, because state law precluded a personal judgment against the estate administrator, and that plaintiff’s factual claim was simply wrong. The court agreed and granted the motion, concluding that the judgment was not a personal judgment under state law.
In Phox v. NCO, plaintiff alleged that defendant violated the FDCPA and FCRA by obtaining his credit report without a permissible purpose. Defendant moved to dismiss, arguing that debt collection was a permissible purpose under the FCRA, and that there was no other alleged wrongdoing to support an FDCPA claim. The court granted the motion, finding that the collection activity was a permissible purpose which demonstrated that the FCRA and derivative FDCPA claim were without merit.
► Back to News & Resources
