Consumer complaint received 2022-07-04
Company: McCalla Raymer Leibert Pierce, LLC
State: GA
Product: Debt collection
Sub-product: Mortgage debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed
Sub-issue: Debt was paid

Complaint:
The Consumer Financial Protection and the Federal Trade Commission [ Federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) ] violations here, arise out of litigation activities offered as part of Managing Partner  Attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX practice of law which arguably occur exclusively within the Firms McCalla Raymer Leibert Pierce , LLC relationship with its clients, particularly XXXX. 

In addition to, violation of the Cease-and-Desist, Violation of Regulation F and Violation of 15 U.S. Code 1692c Communication in connection with debt collection that violated the Consumer Financial Protection and the Federal Trade Commission [ Federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) ] starting around and about XX/XX/XXXX to date. 

In the instant complaint Managing Partner Attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX has attempted to collect a allege debt directly and indirectly from Complainant that was paid in full. Managing Partner Attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX when asked by Complainant are you a debt collector. Managing Partner Attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX admitted those were legal questions and never disclose a material fact. Managing Partner Attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX by admitting, [ " Pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, you are advised that this office may be deemed to be a debt collector and any information obtained may be used for that purpose ], '' is deceptive practice. Managing Partner Attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX litigation practices violate the FDCPA and XXXX. Managing Partner Attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX a licensed attorney, regularly collects or attempts to collect, directly or indirectly, debts owed or due or asserted to be owed or due another through consumer-debt-collection litigation. Managing Partner Attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX is therefore a debt collector under the FDCPA. 15 U.S.C. 1692a ( 6 ). 

The definition of a debt collector explained by the Federal Trade Commission. 
Debt Collector means any Person who uses any instrumentality of interstate commerce or the mail in any business the principal purpose of which is the collection of any Debts, or who regularly collects or attempts to collect, directly or indirectly, Debts owed or due or asserted to be owed or due another. The term also includes any creditor who, in the process of collecting its own Debts, uses any name other than its own which would indicate that a third Person is collecting or attempting to collect such Debts. The term also includes any Person to the extent such Person collects or attempts to collect any Debt that was in default at the time it was obtained by such Person. Violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, FDCPA 's prohibitions on harassment and abuse, false or misleading representations, and unfair practices by debt collectors when collecting consumer debt directly or indirectly. 
Managing Partner Attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX meets the definition of a debt collector explained by the Federal Trade Commission. 

Consumers may act to avoid injury before it occurs if they have reason to anticipate the impending harm and the means to avoid it, or they may seek to mitigate the damage afterward if they are aware of potential avenues toward that end. 
It is a fact, material fact, and undisputed material fact that Managing Partner Attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX received proper notice to cease -and -desist as required by Georgia Law and Federal Law. Managing Partner  Attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX received proper notice and continued with collections attempts that violated the Cease-and-Desist, Violation of Regulation F and Violation of 15 U.S. Code 1692c Communication in connection with debt collection that violated the Consumer Financial Protection and the Federal Trade Commission [ Federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) ] starting around and about XX/XX/XXXX to date. 

It is a fact, material fact and undisputed material fact that On XX/XX/XXXX Escalation Manager, XXXX XXXX, admitted, " Ok, XXXX XXXX I do see where there are four ( 4 ) payments that was misapplied. Escalation Manager, XXXX XXXX is an employee of XXXX. Escalation Manager, XXXX XXXX admitted XXXX received the {$600.00} and XXXX XXXX XXXX bank statement was not required. It is a fact, material fact and undisputed material fact that Proof of payment is a matter of record with Managing Partner, Attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX, and McCalla Raymer Leibert Pierce , LLC. 
There are no ambiguities surrounding Complainant starting around and about XXXX to date received text messages from Managing Partner, Attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX, that failed to identify the senders as debt collectors that violated both the Consumer Financial Protection and the Federal Trade Commission [ Federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) ] starting around and about XX/XX/XXXX to date. 
Managing Partner, Attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX, failure to Provide Statutorily-Required Notices and Disclosures to Complainant sent Complainant a series of text messages, typically not disclosing that the company is a debt collector violated both the Consumer Financial Protection and the Federal Trade Commission [ Federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) ]. 

It is welled settled that a homeowner 's promissory note, secured by a mortgage on the property, constitutes a " debt '' under the FDCPA. See XXXX XXXX XXXX, Painter, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX ( XXXX XXXX. XXXX ) The failure to Provide Statutorily-Required Notices and Disclosures by Managing Partner Attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX to Complainant starting around and about XX/XX/XXXX to date has caused Complainant mental pain and suffering, emotional distress, injuries, damages, monetary damages, harm, and irreparable harm thats severe. It has also caused Complainant both time and money for the failure to Provide Statutorily-Required Notices and Disclosures to Complainant starting around and about XX/XX/XXXX and to date. 
" Debt '' means any obligation or alleged obligation of a Consumer to pay money arising out of a transaction in which the money, property, insurance, or services which are the subject of the transaction are primarily for personal, family, or household purposes, whether or not such obligation has been reduced to judgment. The Bureau also contends that the types of misconduct alleged above violate 12 U.S.C. 5536 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ), which makes it unlawful to offer or provide to a consumer any financial product or service not in conformity with Federal consumer financial law, or otherwise commit any act or omission in violation of a Federal consumer financial law. ( Resp. at XXXX. ) In other words, a violation of the FDCPA is also a violation of the CFPA under this subsection. 

Managing Partner, Attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX violated both Consumer Financial Protection and the Federal Trade Commission [ Federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) ]. 

LITIGATION ACTIVTIES OF MANAGING PARTNER, ATTORNEY XXXX XXXX XXXX : Managing Partner,  Attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX is a licensed attorney, regularly collects or attempts to collect, directly or indirectly, debts owed or due or asserted to be owed or due another through consumer debt-collection litigation. Managing Partner, Attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX litigation activity is not entitled to the bona fide error defense. [ A ] lawyer who regularly tries to obtain payment of consumer debts through legal proceedings is a lawyer who regularly `attempts ' to `collect ' those consumer debts. 
See XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Supreme Court, XXXX The United States Supreme Court also held that the FDCPA " applies to the litigating activities of lawyers '' engaged in debt collection activities See XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Supreme Court, XXXX This conduct can include litigation, and " documents filed in court in the course of judicial proceedings to collect on a debt... are subject to the FDCPA. '' The statutory text is entirely clear : the FDCPA applies to lawyers and law firms who regularly engage in debt-collection activity. The Supreme Court 's holding aligned with the FDCPA 's definition of " debt collector. '' See id. at 294, 115 S. Ct. at 1490-91 ( citing 15 U.S.C. 1692a ( 6 ) ). " In ordinary English, '' the Court reasoned, " a lawyer who regularly tries to obtain payment of consumer debts through legal proceedings is a lawyer who regularly `attempts ' to `collect ' those consumer debts. '' See id. at XXXX, XXXX XXXX  at XXXX ( citing XXXX 's XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX. XXXX ) ( " To collect a debt or claim is to obtain payment or liquidation of it, either by personal solicitation or legal proceedings. " ) ). 

In the instant complaint, complainant and respondent is not engaged in any litigation between XXXX vs. XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Managing Partner,  Attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX is ligating a case for the Debt Collection Agency for XXXX, XXXX vs. XXXX XXXX Bank, XXXX A. that none of these issues and or dispute in involved. The dispute is Wrongful Attempted Foreclosure by XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. that is ongoing. 

VIOLATION OF CEASE-AND-DESIST BY ATTORNEY XXXX XXXX XXXX It XXXX XXXX XXXX, material fact, and undisputed material fact that Managing Partner, Attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX received proper notice to cease -and -desist as required by Georgia Law and Federal Law Managing Partner, Attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX received proper notice and continued with collections attempts that violated the Cease-and-Desist, Violation of Regulation F and Violation of 15 U.S. Code 1692c Communication in connection with debt collection that violated the Consumer Financial Protection and the Federal Trade Commission [ Federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act XXXX FDCPA XXXX ] starting around and about XX/XX/XXXX to date. Managing Partner, Attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX violated the Cease-and-Desist. Managing Partner, Attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX has not gotten permission from the Court to communication with Complainant before, since or to date. 
TEXT MESSAGES DID NOT IDENTIFY THE SENDERS AS DEBT COLLECTOR At the Federal Trade Commissions request, federal courts in New York and Georgia have temporarily halted three debt collection operations that allegedly violated federal law by threatening and deceiving consumers via text messages, emails, and phone calls. 
The FTC seeks to permanently end the unlawful practices. The texts failed to identify the senders as debt collectors. We begin with XXXX ' contention that the district court erred in granting summary judgment against her on the FTC Act and FDCPA claims. We review de XXXX a district court 's decision to grant summary judgment. See XXXX XXXX v. XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX ( XXXX Cir. XXXX ). 
It is a fact, material fact and undisputed material fact in the instant Complainant the text messages received by Complainant and texted by Managing Partner, Attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX, failed to identify the senders as debt collectors. Summary Judgment is appropriate against Managing Partner, Attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX. 
Managing Partner, Attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX litigation activity is not entitled to the bona fide error defense for violation of the Cease-and-Desist, Violation of Regulation F and Violation of 15 U.S. Code 1692c Communication in connection with debt collection that violated the Consumer Financial Protection and the Federal Trade Commission [ Federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) ] starting around and about XX/XX/XXXX to date.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation