A Georgia federal district court has entered a temporary restraining order against a Georgia-based debt collection operation in response to a complaint filed by the Federal Trade Commission.

According to the complaint, the debt collection operation engaged in a variety of illegal debt collection practices, including:

  • “Masquerading” as law-enforcement officials, government officials or attorneys.

On April 7, the District of Columbia passed the COVID-19 Response Supplemental Emergency and Temporary Amendment Act of 2020 which goes into effect immediately and lasts until 60 days after the emergency ends.  The law prohibits debt collectors from initiating any communication with a debtor through any written or electronic communication, including email or text

On March 27, 2020, the Massachusetts Attorney General filed an emergency regulation interpreting the Massachusetts Consumer Protection Act, M.G.L.  Chapter 93A, to address certain practices by creditors and debt collectors that it has determined to be unfair and deceptive under present circumstances.  The regulation, entitled “Unfair and Deceptive Debt Collection Practices During the State

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently ruled in Horia v. Nationwide Credit & Collection, Inc. that a consumer was not precluded from bringing a second FDCPA lawsuit against a debt collector for failing to notify a credit reporting agency that the debt was disputed even though the first lawsuit brought by

Ballard Spahr partner Stefanie Jackman, who leads the firm’s Debt Collection Team, has been appointed to the new Legal Advisory Board (LAB) that the Consumer Relation Consortium (CRC) is launching in 2020.  The LAB is an exclusive group of not more than ten outside counsel with expertise in the accounts receivable industry who have each

The CFPB has issued a new report on tradelines reported by third-party debt collectors as reflected on credit reports compiled by nationwide consumer reporting agencies.  The third-party collector tradelines consist of those reported by debt buyers and those reported by non-buyers (i.e. where the debt is still owned by the original creditor).  A single debt

It has been reported that, without announcement or warning, the regulations applicable to third-party debt collectors in Massachusetts may have changed.  While the state’s Division of Banks (DOB) and the state’s Attorney General (AG) have traditionally regulated, respectively, third-party debt collectors and first-party creditors, the AG is reported to have changed its website recently to

Beginning in 2019, all California “debt collectors”—including creditors collecting their own debts regularly and in the ordinary course of business—will be required to provide notice to debtors when collecting on debts that are past the statute of limitations and will be prohibited from suing on such debts. The new law is based on provisions in

Regulators from the states of Connecticut, Idaho, Massachusetts, Minnesota and North Dakota (“Participating States”) have entered into a settlement agreement with three affiliated debt collection companies to settle allegations that the companies engaged in collection activities that violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the FTC Act, and state laws and regulations.  The settlement requires