Now Updating
Ballard Spahr LLP v Official Committee of Equity Security Holders

Summarizing by Paris Gyparakis

Coastal Capital, LLC v. Savage

Summarizing by Bradley Pearce

Hart v. Credit Control, LLC

Case Type:
Consumer
Case Status:
Affirmed in part and Reversed in part
Citation:
16-17126 (11th Circuit, Sep 22,2017) Published
Tag(s):
Ruling:
Reversed and remanded in part. Affirmed in part.
Procedural context:
Appeal by Plaintiff ("Hart") of the dismissal of her complaint for violations of 15 USC § 1692 (the “FDCPA”) against Defendant ("Credit Control") by the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida.
Facts:
In Hart's appeal of the dismissal of her complaint by the District Court, the Eleventh Circuit addressed two issues under the FDCPA: (1) whether a voicemail left by a debt collector constitutes a “communication,” and (2) what information is necessary to satisfy the “meaningful disclosure” requirement thereunder. Reviewing the issues de novo, the Eleventh Circuit held that “[w]hile we agree with Hart that the initial voicemail left by Credit Control is a communication within the meaning of the FDCPA, thereby triggering the requirements of § 1692e(11), we disagree with her contention that Credit Control’s individual callers failed to provide “meaningful disclosure” by failing to leave their names” in the voicemails. Specifically, the Eleventh Circuit held that: (1) “a voicemail can, and will be considered a communication under the FDCPA if the voicemail reveals that the call was from a debt collection company and provides instructions and information to return the call,” and (2) “meaningful disclosure is provided as long as the caller reveals the nature of the debt collector’s business, which can be satisfied by disclosing that the call is on behalf of a debt collection company, and the name of the debt collection company,” regardless of whether the caller provides his or her individual name. Accordingly, the District Court’s dismissal of Hart’s complaint was reversed and remanded in part, affirmed in part.
Judge(s):
Tjoflat, Wilson and Robreno.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary. Please Sign In using your ABI Member credentials. Not a Member yet? Join ABI now - it is absolutely worth it!

About us in numbers

3925 in the system

3801 Summarized

2 Being Processed