No “litigation immunity” for dishonest debt collectors
News of the Sayyed v. Wolpoff & Abramson decision is all over the consumer blogosphere today, but it is a pretty important decision, so I will add my $.02.
Wolpoff & Abramson sued Sayyed to collect on a debt. They served interrogatories without any debt collector disclaimer (”this communication is from a debt collector . . .”), and later used false statements in a motion for summary judgment. Sayyed turned around and sued W&A for violating the FDCPA. W&A said that it was immune under the common law for statements made during litigation.
The district court agreed, but the Fourth Circuit overturned the district court, and it is a good day for consumers!
When you post a comment on this blog, you grant us the right to modify or delete your comment, but we have no duty to do so.
