Illinois Court Certifies Class Action Against Debt Collection Company


Have you been contacted by Midland Funding LLC about debts you do not owe or debts for which the statute of limitations has passed? Debt collection companies like Midland Funding LLC are required to abide by the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), and they cannot use unfair or fraudulent methods to collect debts. The FDCPA also protects consumers against harassment from debt collectors. When a debt collection company is alleged to have wronged a wide variety of consumers, can those consumers take part in a class action lawsuit?
That question arose in a recent case against Midland Funding LLC, Midland Credit Management, Inc., and Encore Capital Group, Inc. Illinois consumers got a win in this case, which involved aggrieved consumers seeking class action certification, according to a recent article in Reuters. The case, Wheeler v. Midland Funding, LLC, was decided in late April by U.S. District Court Judge Virginia Kendall in the Northern District of Illinois. If you have been treated unfairly by a debt collection company, what do you need to know about this case?
Limitations for Collecting on Expired Debt
The case began back in 2015 when the plaintiff, Kevin Wheeler, noticed that Midland Credit Management, Inc. (MCM) pulled his credit report. The plaintiff called MCM to find out why his credit had been pulled. MCM indicated that it was trying to collect a credit card debt, and MCM offered to settle the debt with the plaintiff for 40% of the total debt. The plaintiff did not agree to the settlement. Later on that year, the plaintiff noticed that his credit report had been pulled again. He contacted MCM again, and the company gave him an account number to pull information about his debt. Nowhere in that account did MCM indicate that the statute of limitations had run on collecting the plaintiff’s debt.
The Illinois statute of limitations for collecting the plaintiff’s credit card debt—which dated from 2009—had in fact run. The plaintiff argued that MCM’s failure to inform him that the statute of limitations had run constituted a violation of the FDCPA. The plaintiff recognized that other consumers may have been in a similar situation, and he sought to certify and represent a class through a class action lawsuit. A class action claim would allow many more plaintiffs to join the case if they had been harmed in a similar manner.
Certifying a Class Action
According to the case, MCM and the other defendants argued that the plaintiff could not file a class action for the following reasons:
  • Plaintiff did not have standing because he had not suffered actual harm;
  • Plaintiff failed to establish the commonality and predominance elements of Rule 23;
  • Plaintiff’s claims did not meet the typicality and adequacy elements under Rule 23; and
  • Class claims would not be superior to a potential individual claim.
The court ultimately determined that the above arguments were invalid and that the plaintiff could certify the following class:
  • All individuals with Illinois addresses;
  • Who accessed the MCM website;
  • Were offered a settlement or discount on a credit card debt for which the last payment was made more than five years prior to MCM accessing the debt information; and
  • Where accessing was on or after a date one year prior to the filing of the claim.
Learn More from an Oak Park Consumer Protection Lawyer
When a class action is certified, the plaintiff can move forward with a class action and other members of the class can join. If you believe you meet the requirements of the class because you were contacted by MCM about a debt for which the statute of limitations had passed, you should discuss your case with an Oak Park consumer protection lawyer. Contact the Emerson Law Firm today for more information.
See Related Blog Posts:


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

New Information on Debts That Bankruptcy Cannot Discharge

Learning About Different Types of Wills

Younger Parents Need an Estate Plan