Diana Mey, of Wheeling, West Virginia., sued and received judgment for more than $10 million against an  abusive debt collection company.

A debt collector with a debt buying company called Reliant Financial Associates, or RFA, left a message implying that her house was in jeopardy if she didn’t pay a debt. The message stated:

“I’m calling in regards to a preliminary asset liability investigation. They are in the process of serving some court documents in regards to case 29369… They have some information now pending questions at the property,… Springdale Avenue, in Wheeling, West Virginia. It is in your best interests to contact the department. You are required to contact 866-764-9779.”

It is illegal for debt collectors to make empty threats about serving people with a lawsuit or seizing their home. And it was especially galling to Mey, who says she is debt-free.

A Michigan court has found that debt collectors violated Federal law by communicating with a consumer’s mother-in-law, adult daughter, friend and neighbor about the consumer’s debt.

Russell v. Goldman Roth Acquisitions, LLC et al., No. 1:10-cv-1224, 2012 WL 762906, — F. Supp. 2d — (W.D. Mich. Mar. 12, 2012)

In a recent Beaumont, Texas lawsuit, the plaintiff John C. White claims he sent a letter to debt collector Portfolio Recovery Associates on November 3, 2010, stating that the company must stop attempts at contacting him through phone calls.  According to the lawsuit, the telephone calls were “so persistent and repeated with such frequency as to be considered hounding the plaintiff.”

Portfolio Recovery Associates is accused of violating the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act by continuing to contact the consumer after receiving the consumer’s letter.  The defendant is also accused of violating the Texas Debt Collection Act by causing White’s telephone to ring repeatedly, with the intent to annoy or abuse and for invasion of privacy by intrusion into private affairs.

The plaintiff is asking for an award of actual, statutory and punitive damages, court costs, attorney’s fees.

Eastern District of Texas, Case No. 1:12-cv-00116

An Ohio consumer sued lawyers who filed collection suits in a certain Ohio court on behalf of the Lebanon Citizens National Bank and against consumers who lived in other counties.  By doing so, the collection lawyers violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) and a parallel state law requiring consumer collection actions to be brought in the county where the consumer resides or where they signed the contract sued on. Although the defendants deny liability, they have agreed to a settlement under which each individual who was sued or had other legal action taken against them in the wrong county during the two years prior to the filing of the class action will receive $600.00.

Portfolio Recovery Associates, a large national collection agency, has been sued in Federal Court.

The lawsuit alleges that the collection agency violated the law by constantly and continuously placing collection calls to the consumer’s residence and place of work. The consumer states in his complaint that the defendant collection agency has called more than 100 times.

The defendant is also accused of violating the FDCPA by contact the consumer at his place of employment, harassing and abusing him with the collection of the debt, communicating to the consumer at an inconvenient time, and for failing to send the consumer a validation notice within five days of their initial communication to him.

The complaint asks for an award of statutory damages, actual damages, costs and attorney’s fees.
United States District Court, Eastern District of Texas, Lufkin Division, Case No. 9:12-cv-00008

A debt collector is being sued for calling a consumer and leaving messages without disclosing its true business name in violation of State and Federal laws.

A collection agency called “MRS PBO LLC” is accused of violating the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and various state laws for not disclosing its true name and for calling the consumer’s brother and leaving voicemail messages regarding her debt.

The defendant is further accused of using false representations or deceptive means to collect a debt or to obtain information concerning a consumer.

The plaintiff is asking for an award of statutory damages, actual damages for personal humiliation, mental anguish, emotional distress, treble damages, attorney’s fees, interest, and court costs.

Dobbs v. Mrs BPO LLC, United States District Court, Eastern District of Texas, Case No. 4:12-cv-00015

Lawsuits citing Fair Debt Collection Practices Act violations reached 11,359, exceeding last year’s record of 10,914, according to WebRecon LLC, a Grand Rapids, Mich.-based company that tracks the data from the courts.