FDCPA Cases Continue To Define What Congress Did Not

By Ellen Silverman, Concepcion Montoya, Dana Briganti and Matthew Corwin (May 1, 2018, 11:47 AM EDT) -- The Second Circuit recently issued a key decision under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, concluding a collection notice that does not notify a borrower that interest and fees are not accruing on a debt is not misleading as long as the notice correctly states the consumer's balance. The decision in Taylor v. Financial Recovery Services Inc.[1] exemplifies the nuances and often difficult interpretations faced by courts seeking to determine what constitutes an "abusive" practice under the FDCPA.  

Since Congress enacted the FDCPA in the 1970s to curb abusive debt collection practices,[2] the act has been the subject of extensive litigation. Specific...

Stay ahead of the curve

In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You have to know what’s happening with clients, competitors, practice areas, and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.

  • Access to case data within articles (numbers, filings, courts, nature of suit, and more.)
  • Access to attached documents such as briefs, petitions, complaints, decisions, motions, etc.
  • Create custom alerts for specific article and case topics and so much more!


Hello! I'm Law360's automated support bot.

How can I help you today?

For example, you can type:
  • I forgot my password
  • I took a free trial but didn't get a verification email
  • How do I sign up for a newsletter?
Ask a question!