Common Sense Prevails! Seventh Circuit Affirms Consumer was not Harmed by Letter and Dismisses FDCPA case

The Debt Collection Drill

内容由John K. Rossman提供。所有播客内容（包括剧集、图形和播客描述）均由 John K. Rossman 或其播客平台合作伙伴直接上传和提供。如果您认为有人在未经您许可的情况下使用您的受版权保护的作品，您可以按照此处概述的流程进行操作https://zh.player.fm/legal。

5y ago 13:13

MP3•单集首页

已归档的系列专辑 ("不活跃的收取点" status)

When? This feed was archived on February 04, 2024 09:07 (3M ago). Last successful fetch was on October 07, 2021 02:04 (2+ y ago)

Why? 不活跃的收取点 status. 我们的伺服器已尝试了一段时间，但仍然无法截取有效的播客收取点

What now? You might be able to find a more up-to-date version using the search function. This series will no longer be checked for updates. If you believe this to be in error, please check if the publisher's feed link below is valid and contact support to request the feed be restored or if you have any other concerns about this.

Debt collectors defending against hyper-technical FDCPA lawsuits by consumer attorneys commonly ask the same question: “How could the consumer possibly have been harmed by this supposed violation of the FDCPA?” The question is especially poignant when the purported FDCPA violation arises from a collection letter the consumer never read or from the language in the collection letter upon which the consumer never intended to rely. Does the concept of “no harm, no foul” apply to the FDCPA?

In this episode of the Debt Collection Drill podcast, Moss & Barnett attorneys John Rossman and Mike Poncin discuss the recent ruling by the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in the Casillas matter dismissing an alleged hyper-technical FDCPA letter violation. They also discuss the recent ruling by the Second Circuit Court of Appeal regarding interest and share thoughts on the CFPB’s proposed debt collection rules.

83集单集

#Business #John K. Rossman #MBA #Podcasting Education