Our Orlando attorneys assist consumers with a variety of consumer-related issues, including consumer fraud, consumer law litigation, deceptive motor vehicle sales, deceptive or unfair auto repair practices, auto repair fraud, defense of creditor lawsuits, fraudulent misrepresentation, telephone collection harassment, and unfair and deceptive trade practices.
Call us at 407-965-5519 about your consumer law issue or contact us here.
New demand letter to car dealer requirement In 2014 the Florida legislature introduced a new law that imposes a new presuit requirement of a demand letter before filing lawsuits against motor vehicle dealers for…
A judgment has been entered against you. What can do to get rid of the judgment? There are a few ways you may be able to rid yourself of the judgment – when…
A question often asked is, “If I sign a contract can I get out of it?” Essentially, as with most situations, the answer is “it depends.” While in many situations you might…
Collection of debts in Florida is regulated by both federal law (the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act) and state law (the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act, or the “FCCPA”).
The FCCPA enumerates 19 different things that people may not do in Florida when collecting a debt. Violation of this law can bring forth a civil cause of action against the person collecting the debt.
At first, Attorney Gregory P. Turza probably thought it was a great business decision when he hired a company to create a promotional newsletter called the “Daily Plan-It” and distribute it to a targeted list, which included numbers from the Illinois CPA Society and his business contacts.
When one of his “Daily Plan It” fax recipients filed a class action lawsuit against the attorney, his marketing strategy turned into a disaster. On behalf of the class of recipients of the faxes, the Plaintiff sought $4,215,000 in statutory damages – $500 for each fax multiplied by the alleged 8,430 times the Daily Plan-It was faxed – against Attorney Turza, who is located in Skokie, Illinois.
From 2004 to 2009, Plaintiff Craig Smallwood clocked more than 20,000 hours on Lineage II, a fantasy massive multiplayer online role playing game (MMORPG), he claims in a current lawsuit. For perspective, that averages out to nine hours a day, seven days a week, for six full years.
Lineage II gave Smallwood such great feelings of euphoria and satisfaction that he became psychologically dependent and addicted, he claims. The psychological dependence and addiction caused by MMORPGs has been recognized; however, the games makers, NC Interactive Inc. and NCsoft Corporation, never gave any notice or warning of such dangers, Smallwood alleges.
Here is the first episode of ConlinLaw! This episode is on William Ebsary Jr. v. Twins Luncheon, 17 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 443a, a case from the Sixth Judicial Circuit in and…
It’s no secret, with the falling economy, that collection practices and lawsuits against debt collectors have been on the rise. One recent court decision may have given consumers in Florida even more protections from unscrupulous creditors.
In Florida, like in many states, debt collectors must comply with at least two bodies of statutory law. First, there is the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), a federal law enacted by Congress in 1978 that establishes general standards of conduct, defines and restricts abusive collection practices, and provides specific rights for consumers. Next, the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act (FCCPA), a state law enacted by the Florida legislature in 1993, gives consumers additional protections.
With some exemptions, the state act (specifically, Fla. Stat. § 559.555) requires collection agencies engaging in business within the state of Florida to register with the Florida Office of Financial Regulation. To register, they must pay a $200.00 fee and provide certain information to the Office, and they must renew their registration annually. Although the state act allows consumers to sue debt collectors for various other reasons, it provides no private right of action for a consumer to sue a debt collector for its failure to register.
However, a few months ago, in LeBlanc v. Unifund CCR Partners, 601 F.3d 1185 (11th Cir. 2010), the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit addressed whether a consumer in Florida could, pursuant to the federal act, sue a collection agency for its failure to register with the Florida Office of Financial Regulation in violation of the state act.
Leave a Reply