Source: http://bipc1.bmobilized.com/?task=get&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bipc.com%2Fthe-abcs-of-statutory-consumer-protection-liability
Timestamp: 2018-02-20 02:11:40
Document Index: 490442152

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 1692', '§ 559', '§ 1692', '§ 559', '§ 559', '§ 1692', '§ 1681']

The ABCs of Statutory Consumer Protection Liability | Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney PC
The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692 et seq. (FDCPA) and Florida’s state law equivalent, the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act, Fla. Stat. §§ 559.55 et seq. (FCCPA), were enacted to protect individuals from harassing debt collection behavior. Violations of the FDCPA continue to top the list of complaints received by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. See WebRecon LLC, 2016 Year in Review: FDCPA Down, FCRA & TCPA Up , (last checked May 17, 2017). The most common complaint received is based on collection attempts that continue despite the debt not being owed by the complainant. See id. In addition to any actual damages suffered, successful plaintiffs can recover statutory damages of up to $1,000 for individual claims. See 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(a)(2)(A) and Fla. Stat. § 559.77(2).
The FCRA may sound familiar because it was the center of the recent Supreme Court case, Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins , 136 S. Ct. 1540, 194 L. Ed. 2d 635 (2016). Spokeo involved the issue of whether a technical violation – with no actual injuries attributed to the purported violation – permits a plaintiff to bring a claim directly before the United States Supreme Court. The ruling, that the appellate court failed to determine whether the alleged violations caused a concrete injury required for Article III standing, continues to be used by both the plaintiff and defense side for similar statutory claims. In fact, the Spokeo opinion already has been cited in more than 650 written opinions since its issuance a little less than a year ago.
Despite the availability of statutory damages, the driving force behind most of these cases is the attorney’s fee provisions that entitle a successful plaintiff to an award of their reasonable attorney’s fees. See , e.g. , Dish Network Service L.L.C. v. Myers , 87 So. 3d 72, 76 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012)(“[I]n this type of statutory fee case where the damages are relatively small, as the lawsuit progresses, it quickly becomes a larger monetary asset for the law firm than for the client.”).
In most instances, these consumer-oriented statutes do not have a reciprocal attorneys’ fee provision if the defendant prevails. Instead, to recover their fees incurred in defending the action, defendants must meet a higher burden and show that a claim asserted by a plaintiff lacked a justiciable issue of law or fact or that the claim was filed in bad faith or for the purposes of harassment. See Fla. Stat. § 559.77(2), 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(a)(3), and 15 U.S.C. § 1681n(c); see also Tucker v. CBE Group, Inc. , 710 F. Supp. 2d 1301, 1307-08 (M.D. Fla. 2010) (holding that award of attorney’s fees appropriate when plaintiff failed to dismiss claims despite discovery in case contradicting most of the allegations contained in the complaint); Rhinehart v. CBE Group, Inc. , 714 F. Supp. 2d 1183, 1185-86 (M.D. Fla. 2010) (same); Conner v. BCC Fin. Mgmt. Servs., Inc. , 597 F. Supp. 2d 1299 (S.D. Fla. 2008) (finding that, among other things, the failure to file substantive responses to the motions for summary judgment demonstrated that the case was “clearly frivolous”). The number of cases awarding defendants their fees and costs are far outnumbered by cases denying such requests. Given the heightened burden required for a defendant to recover its fees and costs, the possibility of a defense award does not appear to be a deterrent.