The below is a list of 50 clear violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.[1] Most of these are in the collection-litigation landscape.
This list was first inspired by only one provision—FDCPA § 1692e(10)[2]—a “catch-all” provision that penalizes deceptive “means” to collect debts. But I tossed in other violations of a similar nature, which are mostly encompassed within FDCPA § 1692e (“False or misleading representations").
- Threatening a lawsuit or filing a lawsuit on a time-barred debt (too old)
- Misrepresenting the collector’s legal rights (i.e. a right to communicate with third parties, or a right to execute on a judgement without one having been entered)
- Continuing efforts to collect on a claim that the collector knew was not valid
- Misrepresenting the urgency or imminence of a collection lawsuit
- Threatening suit in absence of an assignment or ownership of the debt
- Misrepresenting a creditor’s authority to sue
- Attaching self-created account statements to a collection complaint as if they were generated by the originating creditor[3]
- Falsely threatening to report the consumer’s debt to third parties, such as consumer’s employer or credit-reporting agency
- Misrepresenting credit-repair issues in the context of payment relating to credit scores, late payments, and old accounts
- Misrepresenting the expiration of the right to dispute a debt
- Demanding a full balance of an installment contract in the absence of an acceleration clause
- Using false or fictitious names
- Creating a false sense of urgency as to the timing of a reply
- Misrepresenting that the collector only as the authority to accept payment in full
- Falsely implying that the collector is providing legal advice to the creditor
- Threatening to take legal action that would amount to the unauthorized practice of law
- Contradicting or confusing the consumer’s debt-verification rights
- Compelling payment through Western Union or Overnight mail
- Falsely implying a connection to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS)
- Deterring the consumer from answering a complaint or from seeking legal advice
- Misrepresenting the number and type of collection-agency employees (for example, claiming to have “detectives” or an “investigative division”)
- Misrepresenting the consumer’s obligations by threatening to collect fees or charges not owed by the consumer
- Unlicensed debt collection. In New York City, you can search it here
- Knowingly engaging in or profiting in sewer service
- Implying, or using documents that falsely imply, that a default judgment was already entered
- Misrepresenting the identity of the creditor or whom to pay
- Bringing the collection lawsuit outside the statute of limitations
- Bringing a lawsuit without any intention of meeting the burden of proof
- Falsely attesting to personal knowledge of a creditor’s business records
- Pursuing a collection lawsuit, or selling the alleged debt, knowing that the wrong party was targeted for the debt
- Suing on a debt that has been discharged in bankruptcy
- Seeking pre-judgment interest that is not allowable under state law
- Suing twice for the same debt
- Taking action on a breached settlement agreement without sending a notice to cure required in a settlement agreement
- Falsely implying a previous award of attorneys’ fees
- Seeking the collection of debt covered by third parties, for example Worker’s Compensation relating to a covered medical debt
- Contacting a consumer who is represented by an attorney
- Sending a verification response directly to a consumer when verification was demanded by the consumer’s attorney
- Threatening a collection lawsuit when it wasn’t intended, or as imminent as represented
- Threatening a collection lawsuit when such action would exceed the collector’s contractual authority
- Threatening a collection lawsuit before verification, or before a statutory or contractual period for the consumer to cure delinquency
- Threatening a garnishment without a judgment or court order
- Enforcing a judgment that had already been vacated
- Stating or implying that a consumer lacks a legal defense to a collection lawsuit
- Stating or implying that a collection lawsuit had been commenced when it hadn’t
- Stating or implying that a judgment had been entered when it hadn’t
- Adding unauthorized charges or judgment costs without a judgment
- Falsely threatening referral to an attorney
- Misrepresenting rights under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.
- False threats of “investigations” into the consumer’s “assets”
[1] Fair Debt Collection Practices Act
15 U.S. Code SUBCHAPTER V—DEBT COLLECTION PRACTICES
§ 1692. Congressional findings and declaration of purpose
§ 1692a. Definitions
§ 1692b. Acquisition of location information
§ 1692c. Communication in connection with debt collection
§ 1692d. Harassment or abuse
§ 1692e. False or misleading representations
§ 1692f. Unfair practices
§ 1692g. Validation of debts
§ 1692h. Multiple debts
§ 1692i. Legal actions by debt collectors
§ 1692j. Furnishing certain deceptive forms
§ 1692k. Civil liability
§ 1692l. Administrative enforcement
§ 1692m. Reports to Congress by the Bureau; views of other Federal agencies
§ 1692n. Relation to State laws
§ 1692o. Exemption for State regulation
§ 1692p. Exception for certain bad check enforcement programs operated by private entities
[2] A debt collector may not use any false, deceptive, or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt. Without limiting the general application of the foregoing, the following conduct is a violation of this section:
...
(10) The use of any false representation or deceptive means to collect or attempt to collect any debt or to obtain information concerning a consumer.
[3] Hartman v. Great Seneca Fin. Corp., 569 F.3d 606 (6th Cir. 2009).