On May 7, 2024, the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey issued a decision holding that the use by a debt collector of the Model Form validation notice under Regulation F does not guarantee compliance with the requirements of 15 U.S.C. § 1692g or other sections of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA).[1] Consequently, the court joined “several other district courts in finding that compliance with Regulation F and the CFPB’s Model Form in and of itself does not provide a ‘safe harbor’ from all alleged violations of the FDCPA.”
Case Background
In Devoe, a pro se plaintiff brought a putative class action alleging violations of the FDCPA because he received an undated initial collection letter from defendant debt collection company, which stated that plaintiff owed a debt of $10,458.33 related to a credit card account. The letter specified that plaintiff owed such amount “as of 4/18/2021” and provided that “between 4/18/2021 and today,” plaintiff was charged $0.00 in interest and fees. Plaintiff claimed that he was misled as to the status of the debt because the letter was not dated, and as such, he did not know whether $10,458.33 was the current amount owed as of the date he received the letter and could not determine to what date “today” referred.
The debt collector moved to dismiss, arguing that: (1) the Complaint fails to show that the initial collection letter violated any provision of the FDCPA; (2) defendant complied with the FDCPA and its corresponding regulations; (3) defendant is entitled to safe harbor protection under the FDCPA because its letter mirrored the CFPB’s model form letter; and (4) a federal court in California recently dismissed the same claims against defendant based on a letter nearly identical to the one it sent to plaintiff.
Rejecting Safe Harbor
The New Jersey District Court rejected defendant’s arguments that its use of the CFPB’s model form provided a safe harbor from the asserted FDCPA claims. Instead, the court in Devoe reiterated that according to the plain language of 12 C.F.R. § 1006.34(d)(2)(i), the safe harbor provision applies only to alleged violations of Regulation F, but not necessarily to alleged violations of the FDCPA. To read more click here.