2002 Update on the Federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act
The federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA or "Act") was enacted in 1977. This year's Survey marks twenty-five years of litigation under the Act. Over the years, many technical problems of interpretation under the Act have emerged and remain unresolved. The Federal Trade Co...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The Business Lawyer 2002-05, Vol.57 (3), p.1323-1331 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1331 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 1323 |
container_title | The Business Lawyer |
container_volume | 57 |
creator | Lucas, Laurie A. Harrell, Alvin C. |
description | The federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA or "Act") was enacted in 1977. This year's Survey marks twenty-five years of litigation under the Act. Over the years, many technical problems of interpretation under the Act have emerged and remain unresolved. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has repeatedly urged legislative amendments to the Act in its annual reports to Congress. This year, as well as last year, the FTC also requested an exemption to the Act's general prohibition on the power of the FTC to promulgate regulations under the Act. Specifically, the FTC requests an exemption for purposes of promulgating model collection letters which would insulate those debt collectors who use them from liability based on the form of the letter. In addition, two amendments were introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives in an attempt to resolve some of the technical issues and address various complaints. Many commentators have argued that the Act's technical nature has led to widespread abuse of the Act's attorneys' fees provisions by some attorneys. Over the years, this Survey has noted many of the same types of concerns about the direction of FDCPA litigation. |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_reports_228499554</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A87783094</galeid><jstor_id>40688090</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>A87783094</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-g303t-230e1e92eaa4c7264980aad3b2a5d8146452cd3829a1937342ad899c1ed388783</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptz0tLAzEQAOAgCtbHTxCiZxfy2t3k4KFUq0JBD_a8TJNpTdlu1iQe_Pem1IOHMod58DHMnJCJ4I2quJb6lEwYY23VaGPOyUVK29JyoeWEPAjGBF2ODjLSMND8iXSODiP0dA4-0kdcZToLfY82-wLeI5TCYqJTm6_I2Rr6hNd_-ZIs508fs5dq8fb8Opsuqo1kMldCMuRoBAIo24pGGc0AnFwJqJ3mqlG1sE5qYYAb2UolwJVTLccy1K2Wl-T2sHeM4esbU-4ijiHm1AmhlTF1rYq5O5gN9Nj5YR1yOXXnk-2mui1LmNmj-yNog8P-4TDg2pfxf14d4SUc7rw95m8OfptyiN0Y_Q7iT6dYozUzTP4Ch6t1gg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>228499554</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>2002 Update on the Federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act</title><source>HeinOnline Law Journal Library</source><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><creator>Lucas, Laurie A. ; Harrell, Alvin C.</creator><creatorcontrib>Lucas, Laurie A. ; Harrell, Alvin C.</creatorcontrib><description>The federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA or "Act") was enacted in 1977. This year's Survey marks twenty-five years of litigation under the Act. Over the years, many technical problems of interpretation under the Act have emerged and remain unresolved. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has repeatedly urged legislative amendments to the Act in its annual reports to Congress. This year, as well as last year, the FTC also requested an exemption to the Act's general prohibition on the power of the FTC to promulgate regulations under the Act. Specifically, the FTC requests an exemption for purposes of promulgating model collection letters which would insulate those debt collectors who use them from liability based on the form of the letter. In addition, two amendments were introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives in an attempt to resolve some of the technical issues and address various complaints. Many commentators have argued that the Act's technical nature has led to widespread abuse of the Act's attorneys' fees provisions by some attorneys. Over the years, this Survey has noted many of the same types of concerns about the direction of FDCPA litigation.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0007-6899</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2164-1838</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Chicago: Section of Business Law of the American Bar Association</publisher><subject>Annual reports ; Attorneys ; Attorneys fees ; Class action lawsuits ; Collection (Accounting) ; Commercial law ; Consent decrees ; Consumer protection ; Credit collections ; Debt collection ; Fair Credit Reporting Act 1970-US ; Fair Debt Collection Practices Act 1977-US ; Federal court decisions ; Federal legislation ; Fees ; Fees & charges ; Financial liabilities ; Financial services industry ; Judges & magistrates ; Jurisdiction ; Laws, regulations and rules ; Litigation ; Plaintiffs ; Provisions ; State court decisions ; Statutory damages ; Statutory law ; Surveys</subject><ispartof>The Business Lawyer, 2002-05, Vol.57 (3), p.1323-1331</ispartof><rights>2002 American Bar Association</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2002 American Bar Association</rights><rights>Copyright American Bar Association, Section of Business Law May 2002</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/40688090$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/40688090$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>312,314,778,782,789,801,58004,58237</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Lucas, Laurie A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Harrell, Alvin C.</creatorcontrib><title>2002 Update on the Federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act</title><title>The Business Lawyer</title><description>The federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA or "Act") was enacted in 1977. This year's Survey marks twenty-five years of litigation under the Act. Over the years, many technical problems of interpretation under the Act have emerged and remain unresolved. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has repeatedly urged legislative amendments to the Act in its annual reports to Congress. This year, as well as last year, the FTC also requested an exemption to the Act's general prohibition on the power of the FTC to promulgate regulations under the Act. Specifically, the FTC requests an exemption for purposes of promulgating model collection letters which would insulate those debt collectors who use them from liability based on the form of the letter. In addition, two amendments were introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives in an attempt to resolve some of the technical issues and address various complaints. Many commentators have argued that the Act's technical nature has led to widespread abuse of the Act's attorneys' fees provisions by some attorneys. Over the years, this Survey has noted many of the same types of concerns about the direction of FDCPA litigation.</description><subject>Annual reports</subject><subject>Attorneys</subject><subject>Attorneys fees</subject><subject>Class action lawsuits</subject><subject>Collection (Accounting)</subject><subject>Commercial law</subject><subject>Consent decrees</subject><subject>Consumer protection</subject><subject>Credit collections</subject><subject>Debt collection</subject><subject>Fair Credit Reporting Act 1970-US</subject><subject>Fair Debt Collection Practices Act 1977-US</subject><subject>Federal court decisions</subject><subject>Federal legislation</subject><subject>Fees</subject><subject>Fees & charges</subject><subject>Financial liabilities</subject><subject>Financial services industry</subject><subject>Judges & magistrates</subject><subject>Jurisdiction</subject><subject>Laws, regulations and rules</subject><subject>Litigation</subject><subject>Plaintiffs</subject><subject>Provisions</subject><subject>State court decisions</subject><subject>Statutory damages</subject><subject>Statutory law</subject><subject>Surveys</subject><issn>0007-6899</issn><issn>2164-1838</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2002</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNptz0tLAzEQAOAgCtbHTxCiZxfy2t3k4KFUq0JBD_a8TJNpTdlu1iQe_Pem1IOHMod58DHMnJCJ4I2quJb6lEwYY23VaGPOyUVK29JyoeWEPAjGBF2ODjLSMND8iXSODiP0dA4-0kdcZToLfY82-wLeI5TCYqJTm6_I2Rr6hNd_-ZIs508fs5dq8fb8Opsuqo1kMldCMuRoBAIo24pGGc0AnFwJqJ3mqlG1sE5qYYAb2UolwJVTLccy1K2Wl-T2sHeM4esbU-4ijiHm1AmhlTF1rYq5O5gN9Nj5YR1yOXXnk-2mui1LmNmj-yNog8P-4TDg2pfxf14d4SUc7rw95m8OfptyiN0Y_Q7iT6dYozUzTP4Ch6t1gg</recordid><startdate>20020501</startdate><enddate>20020501</enddate><creator>Lucas, Laurie A.</creator><creator>Harrell, Alvin C.</creator><general>Section of Business Law of the American Bar Association</general><general>American Bar Association</general><scope>ILT</scope><scope>0U~</scope><scope>1-H</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>885</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ANIOZ</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>FRAZJ</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>L.0</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M1F</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20020501</creationdate><title>2002 Update on the Federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act</title><author>Lucas, Laurie A. ; Harrell, Alvin C.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-g303t-230e1e92eaa4c7264980aad3b2a5d8146452cd3829a1937342ad899c1ed388783</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2002</creationdate><topic>Annual reports</topic><topic>Attorneys</topic><topic>Attorneys fees</topic><topic>Class action lawsuits</topic><topic>Collection (Accounting)</topic><topic>Commercial law</topic><topic>Consent decrees</topic><topic>Consumer protection</topic><topic>Credit collections</topic><topic>Debt collection</topic><topic>Fair Credit Reporting Act 1970-US</topic><topic>Fair Debt Collection Practices Act 1977-US</topic><topic>Federal court decisions</topic><topic>Federal legislation</topic><topic>Fees</topic><topic>Fees & charges</topic><topic>Financial liabilities</topic><topic>Financial services industry</topic><topic>Judges & magistrates</topic><topic>Jurisdiction</topic><topic>Laws, regulations and rules</topic><topic>Litigation</topic><topic>Plaintiffs</topic><topic>Provisions</topic><topic>State court decisions</topic><topic>Statutory damages</topic><topic>Statutory law</topic><topic>Surveys</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Lucas, Laurie A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Harrell, Alvin C.</creatorcontrib><collection>Gale OneFile: LegalTrac</collection><collection>Global News & ABI/Inform Professional</collection><collection>Trade PRO</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Banking Information Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Accounting, Tax & Banking Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Accounting, Tax & Banking Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Standard</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Banking Information Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><jtitle>The Business Lawyer</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Lucas, Laurie A.</au><au>Harrell, Alvin C.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>2002 Update on the Federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act</atitle><jtitle>The Business Lawyer</jtitle><date>2002-05-01</date><risdate>2002</risdate><volume>57</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>1323</spage><epage>1331</epage><pages>1323-1331</pages><issn>0007-6899</issn><eissn>2164-1838</eissn><abstract>The federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA or "Act") was enacted in 1977. This year's Survey marks twenty-five years of litigation under the Act. Over the years, many technical problems of interpretation under the Act have emerged and remain unresolved. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has repeatedly urged legislative amendments to the Act in its annual reports to Congress. This year, as well as last year, the FTC also requested an exemption to the Act's general prohibition on the power of the FTC to promulgate regulations under the Act. Specifically, the FTC requests an exemption for purposes of promulgating model collection letters which would insulate those debt collectors who use them from liability based on the form of the letter. In addition, two amendments were introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives in an attempt to resolve some of the technical issues and address various complaints. Many commentators have argued that the Act's technical nature has led to widespread abuse of the Act's attorneys' fees provisions by some attorneys. Over the years, this Survey has noted many of the same types of concerns about the direction of FDCPA litigation.</abstract><cop>Chicago</cop><pub>Section of Business Law of the American Bar Association</pub><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0007-6899 |
ispartof | The Business Lawyer, 2002-05, Vol.57 (3), p.1323-1331 |
issn | 0007-6899 2164-1838 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_reports_228499554 |
source | HeinOnline Law Journal Library; Jstor Complete Legacy |
subjects | Annual reports Attorneys Attorneys fees Class action lawsuits Collection (Accounting) Commercial law Consent decrees Consumer protection Credit collections Debt collection Fair Credit Reporting Act 1970-US Fair Debt Collection Practices Act 1977-US Federal court decisions Federal legislation Fees Fees & charges Financial liabilities Financial services industry Judges & magistrates Jurisdiction Laws, regulations and rules Litigation Plaintiffs Provisions State court decisions Statutory damages Statutory law Surveys |
title | 2002 Update on the Federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-16T01%3A01%3A16IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=2002%20Update%20on%20the%20Federal%20Fair%20Debt%20Collection%20Practices%20Act&rft.jtitle=The%20Business%20Lawyer&rft.au=Lucas,%20Laurie%20A.&rft.date=2002-05-01&rft.volume=57&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=1323&rft.epage=1331&rft.pages=1323-1331&rft.issn=0007-6899&rft.eissn=2164-1838&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA87783094%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=228499554&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A87783094&rft_jstor_id=40688090&rfr_iscdi=true |