Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 131 views

    FTC Staff Opinion LeFevre-Castle Litigation Activity

    Uploaded by

    TRISTARUSA
    This document summarizes a response from the Federal Trade Commission to questions about debt collection practices under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). The response indicates that providing verification of a debt that pre-dates the debtor's dispute would not violate Section 809 of the FDCPA. It also notes that a recent Supreme Court decision found that litigation to recover a debt constitutes debt collection covered by the FDCPA, so collectors may not attempt to obtain a judgement on a disputed debt without first obtaining the required verification under Section 809(b).

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    FTC Staff Opinion LeFevre-Castle Litigation Activity

    Uploaded by

    TRISTARUSA
    131 views1 page
    This document summarizes a response from the Federal Trade Commission to questions about debt collection practices under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). The response indicates that providing verification of a debt that pre-dates the debtor's dispute would not violate Section 809 of the FDCPA. It also notes that a recent Supreme Court decision found that litigation to recover a debt constitutes debt collection covered by the FDCPA, so collectors may not attempt to obtain a judgement on a disputed debt without first obtaining the required verification under Section 809(b).

    Original Description:

    FTC opinion letter

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document summarizes a response from the Federal Trade Commission to questions about debt collection practices under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). The response indicates that providing verification of a debt that pre-dates the debtor's dispute would not violate Section 809 of the FDCPA. It also notes that a recent Supreme Court decision found that litigation to recover a debt constitutes debt collection covered by the FDCPA, so collectors may not attempt to obtain a judgement on a disputed debt without first obtaining the required verification under Section 809(b).

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    131 views1 page

    FTC Staff Opinion LeFevre-Castle Litigation Activity

    Uploaded by

    TRISTARUSA
    This document summarizes a response from the Federal Trade Commission to questions about debt collection practices under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). The response indicates that providing verification of a debt that pre-dates the debtor's dispute would not violate Section 809 of the FDCPA. It also notes that a recent Supreme Court decision found that litigation to recover a debt constitutes debt collection covered by the FDCPA, so collectors may not attempt to obtain a judgement on a disputed debt without first obtaining the required verification under Section 809(b).

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    You are on page 1of 1

    1/11/2011

    FDCPA Staff Opinion: LeFevre-Castle

    FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION


    WASHINGTON, D.C. 20580 Division of Credit Practices Bureau of Consumer Protection

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

    June 13, 1995 F. Guthrie Castle, Jr., Esq. 301 Koger Center 6555 Quince Road Memphis, TN 38119 Dear Mr. Castle: This is in reply to your letter of March 17, 1995, concerning proper verification of a debt under Section 809 of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). I apologize for the delay. In answer to question #1: Section 809 of the FDCPA does not prescribe any effective date for a Section 809(b) verification. Therefore, providing a verification which pre-dates the debtor's dispute does not appear to be a violation of that Section. In answer to question #2: in view of the recent Supreme Court case, Heintz et al v. Jenkins, (No. 94-367; 1995 U.S. Lexis 2840), decided April 18, 1995, which considered litigation activity to recover a debt to be "collection activity" covered by the FDCPA, it does not appear that a debt collector may attempt to reduce a disputed claim to judgement without obtaining the verification required by Section 809(b). I hope this has been helpful. Sincerely, John F. LeFevre Attorney

    ftc.gov/os/statutes/fdcpa//castle.htm

    1/1

    You might also like