In the News – ranked top ten most active attorney
Web Recon, LLC ranks the most active attorney’s in the consumer field in the country. In a recent ranking, Ari H. Marcus, Esq. of Marcus Zelman, LLC was ranked fourth highest most active attorney for the month of May and tenth highest for 2015.
Class Action filed against Stark & Stark – New Jersey Law Journal
The New Jersey Law Journal recently wrote an article about a case our firm filed against Stark & Stark.
In this case, Plaintiff alleged that Stark & Stark violated Section 1692f(8) of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act by mailing out a collection letter in an envelope in which the consumers account number was visible through the glassine window on the envelope.
The FDCPA was enacted in part to protect the consumers privacy rights. If you have received a collection letter that you believe was sent in a way that intruded on your privacy rights – call Marcus Zelman today at 732-695-3282.
t is commonplace for a collection agency to state in their collection letter language such as: “As of the date of this letter you owe X. Because you may be required to pay interest, late fees, or other charges that may vary from day to day, the amount required to pay your balance in full may be greater than the amount stated here. If you pay the amount stated, an adjustment may be necessary.”
Such language is commonly referred to as the “McCalla Raymer” safe harbor language. It is supposed to be used when the collection agency is charging interest or other fees, so that the consumer is clearly notified of the balance that he or she allegedly owes.
What happens, however, if the collection agency is not charging interest or other charges but they put in the McCalla Raymer language? Our firm recently filed a case (Reeseg v. General Revenue Corporation – Case number 2:14-cv-08033) in the District of New Jersey in which we argue that by putting that language in, the collection agency is deceiving the consumer into believing that the balance may be increasing and that there is a financial benefit to pay quicker.
FCC Strengthens Consumer Protections Under the TCPA
In a 3-2 declaratory ruling, the FCC on June 18, 2015 strengthened consumer protections under the TCPA. Some of the key provisions decided were:
“STOP CALLING!” Consumers have the right to revoke consent to receiving robodialed calls in any reasonable manner.
WRONG NUMBER OR REASSIGNED NUMBERS – Companies get one free call to a wrong or reassigned number but are liable for every call thereafter.
WHAT IS AN AUTO-DIALER? – “Autodialer” is defined in the TCPA as any technology with the capacity to dial random or sequential numbers. This definition ensures that robocallers cannot avoid consumer consent requirements through changes in calling technology design or by calling from a list of numbers.
TEXT MESSAGES? – Under the new ruling, the FCC clarified that consumers are afforded the same protection for texts as they are to calls on their cell phone.
While shockingly two commissioners ruled in favor of giving big businesses more rights to robodial your cell phone, logic won the day.