Landmark Victory! Debt Collector Did Not Deceive Debtor Who Refused to Give Name
Failed to add items
Add to basket failed.
Add to Wish List failed.
Remove from Wish List failed.
Follow podcast failed
Unfollow podcast failed
Landmark Victory! Debt Collector Did Not Deceive Debtor Who Refused to Give Name
-
Narrated by:
-
By:
About this listen
A debt collector must verify the identity of a communication
recipient to ensure a right-party contact while also avoiding a disclosure
about the existence of the debt to a third-party. Thus, a debt collector
must, when asked, provide meaningful information about the purpose of
a telephone call to a third-party – even when the third-party refuses to
identify herself – without disclosing that the call is an attempt to collect
a debt.
In the latest episode of the Debt Collection Drill podcast, Moss &
Barnett attorneys John Rossman and Mike Poncin are joined by attorney
Aylix Jensen who elaborates on her recent, complete victory in Federal
Court establishing that a debt collector did not violate the FDCPA by
stating it was a “financial services company” calling regarding a
“personal business matter” to an unidentified individual – the Plaintiff –
who the Court identified as the correct “customer for the account.”