¶ 3.1(b) The Telephone
In Abrams v. MiraMed Revenue Grp., LLC (S.D. Ind., 2013) the debtor claimed the debt collector contacted her notwithstanding the collector knew or should have known that the debtor was represented by counsel and violated 15 U.S.C. § 1692c(a)(2).
The court said:
"Kirk alleges that MMRG improperly placed 39 telephone calls to his house over a nine-week period in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692d(5); that MMRG improperly attempted to communicate with Mr. Kirk after being informed that Mr. Kirk obtained counsel."
The Act . . .
It looks like you are not signed in or registered! This content is only available to members.
Or Sign In Below: