Opinion ID: 529771
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Credit Bureau's Section 1692k(c) Defense.

Text: 34 As stated earlier, even though the Notice violated three subsections of section 1692e, the Bureau would nonetheless have a defense to these violations if it show[ed] by a preponderance of the evidence that the violation was not intentional and resulted from a bona fide error notwithstanding the maintenance of procedures reasonably adapted to avoid any such error. 15 U.S.C. Sec. 1692k(c) (1982) (emphasis added). The district court concluded, as to the subdivision (5) and (10) allegations, that [t]here is nothing said here that he is going to refer this further to an attorney, and there is no violation of either the letter or the spirit of the law. As to subdivision (11), the district court concluded that the failure to include the requisite disclosures may be excused under the circumstances because the Bureau had no intent to deceive. 35 There was no consideration, however, of the specific requirements of section 1692k(c) that the violation result[ ] from a bona fide error notwithstanding the maintenance of procedures reasonably adapted to avoid any such error. See Seabrook v. Onondaga Bureau of Medical Economics, Inc., 705 F.Supp. 81, 87 (N.D.N.Y.1989) (even if no intentional violation of FDCPA, defendant must establish statutorily required procedures to prevail on Sec. 1692k(c) defense). In any event, it is likely that the violations which we have found resulted from a mistaken view of the law, which section 1692k(c) does not excuse. See Hulshizer v. Global Credit Servs., Inc., 728 F.2d 1037, 1038 (8th Cir.1984) (per curiam); Baker v. G.C. Servs. Corp., 677 F.2d 775, 779 (9th Cir.1982). 36 We note that the Bureau did not plead a section 1692k(c) defense in its answer, or argue it on appeal. Upon remand, the district court should determine in its discretion whether to allow the Bureau to tender a section 1692k(c) defense, should it apply to do so. In the event of an affirmative decision, the defense should be evaluated in accordance with the foregoing discussion. 37