In Simpson v. Safeguard Properties, plaintiff filed a putative class action alleging that defendant failed provide the required disclosures in violation of the FDCPA. Plaintiff moved to certify the class, and defendant opposed the motion by arguing that plaintiff’s dispute of the debt put her in a different position from class members. The court certified the class, concluding that plaintiff’s dispute of the underlying debt did not make her claims atypical, or an inadequate class representative.
In Betz v. Jefferson Capital, plaintiff alleged that defendant violated the FCRA by reporting a student loan debt as delinquent when the debt was fraudulent and by accessing his credit report. The court granted defendant’s motion to dismiss, finding that plaintiff’s admission that defendant was a debt collector attempting to collect a debt showed that there was a permissible purpose for the credit pull, and that defendant was entitled to report the debt without first verifying the legitimacy of the debt.
► Back to News & Resources
