A Consumer Protection and Employment Law Firm Serving California, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Illinois.

Consumers: be mindful of debt collection abuses

Table Of Contents
Summarize with
ChatGPT Claude Gemini Perplexity Grok

For consumers, dealing with debt can be an extremely stressful task. This is particularly the case when creditors are aggressively pursuing payments. Under both federal and state law, there are protections in place for consumers to address the problem, but sometimes creditors fly under the radar, at least for a time. Debt collection companies are notorious for this.

Last year, a debt collection firm operating in Southern California called Asset and Capital Management Group reached a settlement with the Federal Trade Commission over various violations of debt collection law which affected thousands of consumers. Settlement checks were apparently sent out earlier this month. According to the FTC, the company had falsely threatened consumers with litigation, proper seizure, arrest, and wage garnishment, and illegally disclosed debts to debtors’ family members, employers and coworkers. These sort of thing are all illegal, but all too common.

Consumers, of course, do well to be aware of their rights when it comes to debt collection so that they are aware of when they are being taken advantage of and what their options are in terms of remedying the situation. Taking a general look at the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, it is clear that debt collectors are prohibited from various forms of harassment, such as using threats of violence or harm, use of profane language, and repeated calls to annoy the debtor.

The law also prohibits creditors from making false statements when attempting to collect debts. This includes things like accusing debtors of committing a crime, lying about the amount of money owed, and falsely claiming they work for a credit reporting company. Unfair practices are also prohibited, such as attempting to collect fees, interest or charges that aren’t actually owed under the contract and depositing post-dated checks early.

Here, of course, we’ve only touched on some of the debt collection practices which are prohibited under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Consumers who feel that they may be experiencing illegal treatment should contact an experienced attorney to make sure their rights are protected.

Source: Federal Trade Commission, “Debt Collection,” Accessed July 17, 2015. 

Quick Navigation

Free Consultation

Undisclosed
Settlement

TCPA class action against the Los Angeles Times. Final approval granted 2014.

More Details
$750,000
Settlement

Common fund class-wide TCPA settlement against home healthcare provider. Final approval granted.

More Details
$27.6M
Settlement

TCPA class action certified on behalf of approximately 2,000,000 class members under Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3). Subsequently settled on a Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3) basis. Final approval granted.

More Details
$5.2M
Settlement

/

Unruh Act class action on behalf of approximately 240,000 consumers challenging Tinder’s age-based differential pricing for its subscription service. Final approval granted; subsequently went up on appeal.

More Details
$390,000
Settlement

TCPA class action alleging HD Supply sent unauthorized marketing text messages to consumers’ mobile phones without consent between October 21, 2011 and July 26, 2017. Presided over by Judge Fernando M. Olguin. Case terminated January 29, 2018.

More Details
$1,500,000
Settlement

/

TCPA class action against a Kansas-based payday lender alleged to have contacted consumers via prerecorded calls on their cell phones to collect alleged debts without consent. California federal judge granted final approval.

More Details
$6,500,000
Settlement

/

Cal. Penal Code § 632.7 class action certified by contested motion under Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3) on behalf of over 40,000 class members whose calls were recorded without their knowledge or consent. Final approval granted.

More Details
$13,000,000
Settlement

/

$13 Million Class action alleging HSBC recorded consumer telephone calls without knowledge or consent in violation of California’s Privacy Statute (Penal Code § 632.7). California Federal Judge granted final approval.

More Details
$34,000,000
Settlement

/

One of the largest TCPA class action settlements in U.S. history at time of approval. Alleged Chase used an automatic telephone dialing system to contact consumers on their cell phones without prior express consent from July 2008 through December 2013. Settlement class included over 32 million members. Final approval granted March 2016.

More Details
$150,000,000
Settlement

/

Class action on behalf of over 100,000 owners of GM vehicles equipped with allegedly defective LG-manufactured batteries posing fire and safety risks. Litigation commenced December 2020. U.S. District Judge Terrence G. Berg indicated preliminary approval of the $150 million settlement.

More Details
$100,000,000
Settlement

/ /

Landmark gig-economy class action. DoorDash drivers in California and Massachusetts alleged they were wrongly classified as independent contractors rather than employees. Firm served as class counsel. Final approval granted January 13, 2022 — the largest gig-economy worker class settlement in U.S. history at the time.

More Details

Office Locations

Copyright 2025 Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman, P.C. All Rights Reserved.