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

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