Search the Community

BIG LOSE ON THE FDCPA. http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/11-1175_4fc5.pdf Our fount of consumer justice just dried up and blew away on the wind. if you lose your FDCPA case, you may have to pay the CA's attorney fees, regardless. even if you did not bring a frivolous case in bad faith. So , It's an real end to Pro se Filing federal lawsuits on FDCPA claims . if you ever wonder just how badly folks misunderstand the FDCPA nd federal rules of civil procedure, just go to google scholar and search federal courts with " fdcpa" please Write your Congressman and Senator asking them to amend the FDCPA. the FTC even submitted an amicus brief to the court on behalf of the goverment, to no avail. http://www.ftc.gov/os/2012/08/120803marxgeneralamicusbrief.pdf here's a sample letter for your congressman RE; Marx v. General Revenue Corporation Dear _________________, I hope you find the recent Supreme court decision in Marx v General Revenue as apalling as I do. The court has once again obivously misread the United States legislature intent on the FDCPA cost shifting rules in this opinion, now charging the plaintiff with paying the attorney fees of the defendant even if the lawsuit wasn't brought in " bad faith". The specific cost shifting provision in FDCPA 15 usc 1692K(a)(3) allows the taxation of costs against a consumer plaintiff only when the action is brought in bad faith. This section of the FDCPA preserves the Legislatures' carefully reasoned incentives for consumers to bering private enforcement actions that are crtical to carrying out the FDCPA detterent and remedial purposes as envisioned by the United States Congress. Since the expected recovery of such enforcment actions is often modest, and the Federal rule shifting on the offer of judgment playing such a large role, these cases are often settled by the defendants. The consumer who bring a FDCPA case is already in debt, and can never assume that they will prevail against the large, well organized creditor law firms that the defendant's hire for defense. This new ruling that authorizes the defendants to recover thier costs regardless of the FDCPA clauses will create a significant disincentive to the prosecution of private enforcement actions. Please amend the FDCPA to reclarify the congressional intent and to make these costs " Only when the lawsuit is brought in Bad faith, contrary to rule 54(d)(1) . I hope that your take consumer protections seriously, and I hope to vote for you again in the next elections. Sincerely,