Deceptive Debt Collection Practices Targeted by CFPB

Under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), debt collectors cannot harass or threaten debtors in order to collect payments, and they cannot engage in false or deceptive debt collection practices with the aim of collecting money owed. Yet creditors and debt collectors do not always abide by the FDCPA. What happens in the event that a debt collector uses deceptive collection practices in order to recover on a debt? The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) can take action against that collector. According to a recent news release from the CFPB, the Bureau has cited both Encore Capital Group and Portfolio Recovery Associates for buying “debts that were potentially inaccurate, lacking documentation, or unenforceable.”
How Does the FDCPA Define Deceptive Debt Collection Practices?
It is important for consumers to know their rights and to understand that certain federal laws were designed to protect them from unfair practices by debt collectors. Specifically, Section 807 of the FDCPA protects consumers from “false or misleading representations” used by collectors to recover debts. The law specifically states:
“A debt collector may not use any false, deceptive, or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt.”
The law goes on to define false representation in terms of:
  • Character of the debt;
  • Amount of the debt; and
  • Legal status of the debt.
Under the FDCPA, debt collectors also are banned from threatening “to take any action that cannot legally be taken or that is not intended to be taken.”
Companies Must Verify Debt Before Taking Action
When a debt collection business does not abide by the FDCPA, the CFPB can take numerous actions against it. In the case of Encore Capital Group and Portfolio Recovery Associates, the Bureau has ordered these companies to do the following:
  • Overhaul debt collection practices;
  • Overhaul litigation practices;
  • Cease selling debts to third-party buyers;
  • Pay consumer refunds;
  • Pay penalties; and
  • Stop attempting to collection of million in consumer debt.
In terms of the consumer refunds that the companies will have to pay, the CFPB has ordered Encore to provide up to $42 million in refunds to consumers, along with a $10 million penalty. Portfolio Recovery Associates has been ordered to provide $19 million in consumer refunds and to pay a penalty of $8 million. In total, the two companies have been ordered to cease collection actions on nearly $130 million in combined debts.
The director of the CFPB emphasized that the two companies are among the largest debt buyers in our country, and the Bureau will not stand for deceptive or unfair debt collection practices. In total, the companies have bought more than $200 billion in unpaid consumer debts. For millions of dollars of that debt, the companies engaged in illegal practices. According to the CFPB, those practices included:
  • Providing consumers with incorrect balances;
  • Stating incorrect interest rates; and
  • Giving incorrect payment due dates.
In short, companies simply cannot provide “approximate” information with regard to balances, interest rates, and account due dates. Yet the CFPB alleges that the debt buyers did just this.
Contact an Oak Park Consumer Protection Lawyer
If you believe you have been the target of unfair or deceptive collection practices, it is important to speak with an experienced Oak Park consumer protection attorney about your case. Contact the Emerson Law Firm to learn more about how we can assist you.
See Related Blog Posts:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Payday Lending and Predatory Lenders in Illinois

If you are in substantial debt in the Chicago area and are living in a paycheck-to-paycheck cycle, you may have taken out a payday loan to make ends meet. While payday lending is illegal in a number of states due to the predatory nature of these loans, it remains legal in Illinois. As a result, many debtors in the state have used payday lenders, and far too many of those borrowers cannot repay what they owe. According to a recent article from Progress Illinois , consumers have filed complaints about payday lenders in the state, illuminating a need for federal rules that address harmful lending practices . Predatory Payday Lenders and Protections for Consumers Due to the perceived predatory nature of payday loans, twelve states in the country have banned these lenders from operating completely, according to a fact sheet from loans.org . The states that currently have laws prohibiting payday lenders from operating include Arkansas, Arizona, Connecticut, Georgia, Mary...
Read more

Phantom Debt Collection Scams on the Rise in Illinois

Have you been contacted by a person claiming to be a debt collector who is seeking to recover a debt you allegedly owe? If so, you are not alone. According to a recent report from CBS Chicago , such parties claiming to be debt collectors are on the rise, and they are scamming Chicago-area residents. These alleged debt collectors are part of schemes known as “phantom debt collection scams,” since they involve the attempt to collect on a debt that the consumer does not actually owe. How can you avoid becoming a victim in a debt-collection scam ? What should you do if you have been targeted by a fake debt collector? How Do Phantom Debt Collection Scams Work? Now, you might be thinking to yourself: I would never agree to make payment on a debt that I did not owe. But the scam is not always that simple. Parties at the center of debt-collection scams often target consumers who do actually owe debts (to someone or to some entity), and they prey on the fact that these c...
Read more

New Information on Debts That Bankruptcy Cannot Discharge

If you are thinking about filing for bankruptcy in the Oak Park area, it is important to know that certain kinds of debts cannot be discharged in a bankruptcy case. Under U.S. bankruptcy law, these are known as non-dischargeable debts, or exceptions to discharge. There are certain types of debts that have long been identified clearly as non-dischargeable debts, while there are misconceptions about other types of debts that may or may not be dischargeable. As an article in CNBC discusses, the U.S. Supreme Court recently issued a ruling in the case of Bartenwerfer v. Buckley , which clarifies that debts incurred due to another party’s fraud cannot be discharged in an individual’s bankruptcy case. Our Oak Park bankruptcy attorneys can explain the Court’s recent ruling and provide you with additional information on dischargeable and non-dischargeable debts. Supreme Court Says Debt Incurred Due to Another’s Fraud is Non-Dischargeable The recent Bartenwerfer case involved a debtor attempti...
Read more