Source: http://consumerrightslawgroup.com/?page_id=10
Timestamp: 2019-04-22 02:29:11+00:00

Document:
• Bank of America v. Consumer, 18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 487a (Feb. 24, 2011) (granting consumer’s request for attorney’s fees incurred defending against claim for unpaid credit card).
• Unifund CCR Partners v. Consumer, 18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 479a (March 4, 2011) (granting consumer’s request for attorney’s fees incurred defending against claim for unpaid credit card charges).
• Worldwide Asset Purchasing v. Consumer, 17 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 1248a (Sept. 14, 2010) (granting consumer’s request for attorney’s fees incurred defending against claim for unpaid credit card charges after argument that even though Arizona law, which controlled the action, did not provide for reciprocal attorney’s fees, strong public policy of consumer protection supports application of Florida law.).
• CACH v. Consumer, 17 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 267a (Dec. 10, 2009) (granting judgment in favor of consumer for successful defense of $39,404.94 arbitration award for unpaid credit card balance.).
• Consumer v. Superior Recovery Services, 18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 485a (Mar. 1, 2011) (awarding plaintiff-debtor $5,380.99 for defendant’s violations of the Florida Consumer Collection Practice Act).
• Consumer v. Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC, No. 8:10-cv-2399-T-26TGW, 2011 WL 223870 (M.D. Fla. Jan. 24, 2011) (denying defendant-debt collector’s motion to dismiss plaintiff-debtor’s TCPA claims on grounds that TCPA only applies to telemarketers and not debt collectors).
• Consumer v. Bank of America, 18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 684a (denying defendant-debt collector’s motion to dismiss plaintiff-debtor’s FCCPA claim finding that FCCPA applies to any person collecting a debt and denying defendant-debt collector’s request for attorney’s fees finding that FDCPA’s “bad faith” standard applies).
• Equable Assent Financial, LLC v. Consumer, Pasco County Case No: 51-2011-SC-1171-WS, Granting Consumer’s Motion to dismiss a complaint to collect a debt for a credit card.
• Consumer v. Smith, Dean & Associates, Inc., Hillsborough County Case No: 10-CC-26799, Granting Judgment in favor of consumer for $31,950.00 based on Collector’s illegal Collection attempts.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 Case No: 51
 v. 
 Case No: 10