According to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), debt collectors must disclose in every voice mail left for a consumer, that the communication is from a debt collector.  However, the FDCPA also prohibits debt collectors from telling third parties that the consumer owes a debt.  Consequently, this creates a conundrum for debt collectors who leave voice mails for consumers. On the one hand, the debt collector must disclose that the communication is from a debt collector in their message. But on the other hand, disclosing that the communication is from a debt collector may violate the FDCPA’s prohibition of telling third parties about a debt.

The recent case of Edwards v. Niagra Credit Solutions, Inc. involved this exact problem.  Niagra Credit Solutions, in an attempt to comply with the FDCPA’s rule of not disclosing debts to third parties, had a policy of not stating that the call was from a debt collector in voice mails they left for consumers.  However, this policy left them vulnerable to the FDCPA’s other violation of not disclosing the call was coming from a debt collector.

When Niagra Credit was sued under the FDCPA, they defended themselves by stating that if they left the required notice, they risked violating the part of the FDCPA that prohibits disclosing that a consumer owes a debt to a third-party. The judge brushed aside Niagra Credit’s defense of being in an impossible position by pointing out that the FDCPA “does not guarantee a debt collector the right to leave answering machine messages” and held that it is not legal to violate one part of the FDCPA in an attempt to comply with another part.

If you are being harassed by debt collectors in violation of the FDCPA, or if they have disclosed your debt to a third-party, you may be entitled to compensation.  Please call California Consumer Protection Attorney, Todd M. Friedman at 877-449-8898 for a free consultation.


In:

This is attorney advertising. These posts are written on behalf of Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman, P.C. and are intended solely as informational content. These blogs in no way provide specific or actionable legal advice, nor does your use of or engagement with this site establish any attorney-client relationship. Please read the disclaimer

More Insights from the TMF Blog

a group of people in a courtroom looking at a screen

Delta’s Pricing Practices: Building the Case for Legal Action

Dynamic pricing algorithms used by Delta Air Lines may violate consumer protection laws, potentially leading to class-action lawsuits. Previous legal precedents set by actions against other companies over algorithmic bias and discriminatory practices could help challenge these systems. Various attributes like zip code, device type, or browsing history that impact pricing could lead to violation of consumer protection and civil rights protections. Investigations by multiple agencies signal a move towards a stronger stance against such practices.
a black and gold shield with a black shield and a black and gold shield with a black and gold shield and a black and gold shield with a black and gold shield and a black and gold

The Hidden Costs of Surveillance Pricing: What Airlines Don’t Want You to Know

Airlines employ "surveillance pricing," using complex algorithms and extensive data tracking to determine personalized prices for flights. Factors such as browsing history, location, and time of search can covertly influence prices, posing concerns about privacy, fairness, deceptive practices, and legal protections for consumers.
a man standing behind a table with a scale in front of him

Is Delta’s AI Pricing Legal? A Consumer Rights Attorney’s Analysis

As a leading consumer protection law firm with offices across California, Ohio, Illinois and Pennsylvania, the Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman, P.C. is ...