The United States District Court for the District of Oregon recently decided that a debt collection agency’s representative need not provide their personal name in order to give a meaningful disclosure under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”). In Christina Moore v. Account Control Technology, Inc., the plaintiff filed suit against the collection agency defendant claiming that the representative did not provide their personal name. In the phone calls the debt collection representative identified the name of the collection agency and disclosed that it was a debt collection agency attempting to collect a debt. According to plaintiff, this was not a meaningful disclosure required by the FDCPA since they did not provide their personal name. The United States District Court for the District of Oregon disagreed with plaintiff’s “nonpersuasive and nonsensical argument” stating that the debt collection agency’s representative’s personal name is immaterial to whether there is a meaningful disclosure of the caller’s identity. The district court determined that a representative’s name is not “meaningful” to a consumer. “[T]he human caller is not the entity which owns or seeks the debt; the consumer would not satisfy the debt by writing a check to the representative personally; nor would the consumer sue the representative personally for violating the FDCPA.”
For more information on this topic, please contact Stephanie Strickler at 312-334-3465 or firstname.lastname@example.org.