- posted: Jan. 26, 2017
In Douglass v. Forster & Garbus LLP, No. 16-CV-6487CJS (Oct. 26, 2016), plaintiff claimed that a debt collection letter from defendant violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) because the letter failed to disclose that the amount owed by plaintiff may increase due to interest and fees. Defendant moved for judgment on the pleadings and, when the plaintiff submitted an affidavit in opposition to the motion, the court converted it to a motion for summary judgment in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(d).
In support of its motion, defendant claimed that plaintiff was “well aware” that her indebtedness could increase based on the accumulation of interest and fees, as evidenced by the fact that plaintiff had received notice of 42 prior wage garnishments in connection with judgment enforcement proceedings on the underlying debt. The court rejected defendant’s argument regarding constructive notice, finding the recent Second Circuit precedent was “crystal clear”, and defendant’s failure to indicate in this letter that interest and fees would continue accruing beyond the date of the letter constituted “a false, deceptive, or misleading representation”. Accordingly, defendant’s motion was denied.