Dismissal of plaintiff's action under the Federal Debt Collection Practices Act Allen v. LaSalle Bank, N.A., 09-1466, concerned a challenge to the district court's dismissal of a complaint in concluding that, because plaintiff's attorney protected her form any unfair or unconscionable means used to collect the debt, plaintiff had failed to state viable Federal Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) claims, in plaintiff's class action suit against a law firm, arising from an underlying mortgage foreclosure action against the plaintiff brought by the law firm on behalf of a bank.
In vacating the judgment, the court remanded the matter in concluding that the district court did not have the benefit of plaintiff's concession that her claims were predicated only upon section 1692f(1), which defines the collection of an unauthorized debt as a per se "unfair or unconscionable" debt collection method. Here, the only inquiry under section 1692 is whether the amount collected was expressly authorized by the agreement creating the debt or permitted by law.
Related Link:
- Read the Third Circuit's Full Decision in Allen v. LaSalle Bank, N.A., 09-1466
