Gain a better understanding of collection letters, the language contained therein and their collection practices to assure compliance with the FDCPA.
This information will examine specific collection letter language and collection practices. It will specifically address the following collection letter questions that courts have examined and ruled upon
- Do collection letters violate the FDCPA by setting nonexistent deadlines and falsely threatening debtors with imminent legal action if those deadlines were disregarded?; Do collection letters violate the FDCPA by setting nonexistent response deadlines?;
Do collection letters violate § 1692 3(10) by falsely implying the `price of poker’ had gone up because the account was transferred to a litigation department, when in fact the status of the account was no different?; Does a collection letter’s repeated reference to its “Litigation Department” result in a direct violation of § 1692e(3) and § 1692e(10)?; and Does an attorney sending a debt collection letter without having meaningfully reviewed the case prior to issuing a collection letter violate the restrictions imposed by § 1692e?
Collection firms and collection attorneys will have a greater understanding of how courts have viewed and interpreted specific collection letter language and related collection activities by collection firms, collection legal departments and collection attorneys. Be in a position to reexamine your own collection letters, the language contained therein and your collection practices to assure compliance with the FDCPA.
Learning Objectives:
- You will be able to review collection letters that may violate Sect 1692e(5) and (10) by threatening immediate legal actions.
- You will be able to discuss collection letters that may violate Sect. 1692e(10) by setting a 30-day deadline.
- You will be able to recognize language held to be acceptable.
- You will be able to describe language held to be in violation.
This Live Webinar Covers These Hot Issues:
Collection Letters That May Violate Sect 1692e(5) and (10) by Threatening Immediate Legal Action
• Language Held to Be Acceptable
• Language Held to Be in Violation
Collection Letters That May Violate Sect. 1692e(10) by Setting a 30-Day Deadline
• Language Held to Be Acceptable
• Language Held to Be in Violation
Collection Letters That May Violate Sect. 1692e(10) by Stating the Account Was Transferred to the Litigation Department
• Language Held to Be Acceptable
• Language Held to Be in Violation
Whether a Collection Letter Violates Sect 1692e(3) and/or (10) by Referencing the Litigation Department
Collection Letters on Attorney Letterhead
• When Are Attorney Letters Considered "False, Deceptive, or Misleading Representation" - Circuits Are Split
• Attorney's Review of File for Litigation
• The False Representation or Implication That Any Individual Is an Attorney or That Any Communication Is From an Attorney
• The Threat to Take Any Action That Cannot Legally Be Taken or That Is Not Intended to Be Taken
• Threatening Immediate Legal Action
Credit Information (Sponsored by Lorman Education Services)
- CLE
- CPE
- NASBA
For Detailed Credit Information page
click here
Only registered attendee will receive continuing education credit.
Faculty
Richard J. Tomeny, Jr., Richard J. Tomeny Jr. Attorney at Law
- Business lawyer and commercial litigator with extensive experience in banking and finance, commercial transactions, commercial litigation, creditor and debtor bankruptcy, contracts, entity formation, probate, wills, trusts and real estate law
- Member of numerous professional and civic organizations
- Received the highest rating with Martindale Hubbell Law Directory
- Frequent speaker and past professor
- J.D. degree, Loyola University New Orleans School of Law; B.S. degree, University of New Orleans
- Can be contacted at 225-334-8080 or rtomeny@tomenylaw.com
(Not available outside the US)