According to a Credit One bank lawsuit, Richard, a Florida resident, says he made numerous phone calls to the credit reporting agency in question, but the calls continued after he warned it not to call his cell phone. Richard also says he picked up on one of the representatives’ calls and told it not to call his cell phone.
After the phone calls, the representative called Richard’s cell phone to confirm which number was on his bill. But Richard’s cell phone was turned off by the caller before the agent could call Richard back, so the agent asked Richard to pick up the telephone for an important call.
Richard picked up the telephone, but when he hung up the call the representative left a voice mail saying “No, this number is not associated with you.” Richard immediately assumed the caller had hung up on him and notified the Credit Company. The company investigated, found Richard’s number, contacted him and denied that the calls were related to him.
Credit company then sued Richard and won on all counts. Richard later learned that his cell phone was not the only thing on his bill that was affected. He discovered that the same calls occurred several times on his credit cards and auto loan application, as well. The attorney representing Richard’s case, Robert Shea, says there are many other cases like Richard’s that might have been prevented if the company had simply stopped calling.
Credit companies are allowed to call anyone they deem to be a potential customer. This is commonly done when a person does not respond promptly to a credit card or loan request and calls the credit reporting agencies.
According to Shea, some credit companies will even call and harass people who have disputed a loan or card statement. He says some people have called in to ask questions, only to be told “we cannot help you with this,” or that the credit card or loan has already been processed and the customer will be charged late fees.
Credit companies are required by law to keep in contact with people who have disputes with their credit reports. However, they cannot call anyone unless there is a legitimate reason for doing so.
This case is just one of many filed against the credit company. This case, however, is based on state law. Some states require companies to provide detailed information on their calls to customers.
Richard says that because he is a consumer who purchased his home through a bank, the Credit Company can now sue him for making complaints about his credit. Because of this, he is unable to receive a new mortgage. He is also unable to receive a credit card, because he did not complete a credit application with them after he purchased his house.
The lawsuit says Richard filed complaints about the calls on both his credit cards and his car loans. He claims he also complained to the Better Business Bureau about the calls.
The lawsuit claims the Credit Company, because of his complaints about these calls, reported him to the Credit Bureau, the Federal Trade Commission and to the Office of the Comptroller of Currency. The three agencies are in turn reporting this information to Credit Companies that they use to make credit card transactions. This means he is being pursued on three counts of fraud.
Shea says that, under the federal laws of his state, the Credit Company is not permitted to pursue Richard. However, this is not necessarily the case. He says the Credit Company could sue Richard, he would have to show that the Credit Company knew he had complained to any of the three agencies and, if they did, they should have taken action against the Credit Company.
The bank lawsuit was settled out of court and Richard received an agreement, but there is more to this story than just the lawsuit itself. The settlement amount is undisclosed and it is unknown if the terms of the settlement are favorable to Richard.
