The juxtaposition of Sections 1692e and
1692g continues to be a battle ground for the consumer bar and collection
industry. Section 1692e prohibits false,
deceptive or misleading representations in connection with the collection of a
debt. Section 1692g(a) requires that within
five days of initial communication, the debt collector provide the consumer
with a written notice which contains five pieces of information: (a) the amount
of the debt; (b) the name of the creditor to whom the debt is
owed; (c) a statement that unless the consumer, within thirty
days after receipt of the notice, disputes the validity of the debt, or any
portion thereof, the debt will be assumed to be valid by the debt collector;
(d) a statement that if the consumer notifies the debt
collector in writing within the thirty-day period that the debt, or any portion
thereof, is disputed, the debt collector will obtain verification of the debt
or a copy of a judgment against the consumer and a copy of such verification or
judgment will be mailed to the consumer by the debt collector; and (e) a statement that, upon the consumer’s written request within the
thirty-day period, the debt collector will provide the consumer with the name
and address of the original creditor, if different from the current creditor.
A recent case out of the District Court
for Oregon illustrates the extreme positions being taken by the consumer bar
and provides some reassurances to the industry.
In Powers v. Capital Management
Services, the collection agency sent a single letter which identified the
original and current creditor, the account number as “5702” and the amount of
the debt as $565.91. Powers v. Capital Mgmt Servs., 2017 U.S.
Dist. LEXIS 121536 (D. Ore. Aug. 2, 2017).
The consumer filed suit, alleging that: (a) by failing to disclose
whether interest was or was not accruing on the balance of the debt, the agency
violated 15 U.S.C. §1692g(a); and (b) by identifying the account number as
being its last four digits, the agency misrepresented the account number in
violation of 15 U.S.C. §1692e.
In addressing the first issue, the court
quickly drew a distinction between accounts where interest is accruing and
those in which it is not. “Where
interest is not accruing on a debt, the debt collector does not need to state
that no interest is accruing. Rather, it
is only in instances when interest is accruing on a debt does Section
1692g(a)(1) require a debt collector to disclose that fact and include both
principle and interest when stating the amount due.” Id. at *3-4.
Moving to the second issue, the court
was dismissive of the consumer’s claim that the collection agency’s use of the
last four digits of the account number was misleading. The court observed that the numbers used were
associated with the consumer’s account and the notice reflected the exact
amount owing on the account. Moreover, while
there may have been better ways to identify the account – for instance,
preceding the last four digits with xxx-xxx-xxx or with the phrase “account
ending in”, a “consumer of below average
sophistication or intelligence, but still possessing a basic level of
understanding and willingness to read with care, would understand that “5702”
identifies their consumer… credit card account number.” Id. at *6.
No comments:
Post a Comment