Höre Minnesota Law, Presented by Moss & Barnett

Just a few years ago, many in the collection industry were wringing their hands in frustration: the Douglass decision on innocuous information appearing in the windows of envelopes spawned hundreds of class action lawsuits; claims regarding the tax implications of settlements, voicemail message content and call frequency were on the rise; and, lawsuits with collection calls “scripted” by consumer attorneys were being filed nearly every day.  Today, all of these issues are (mostly) in the past as debt collectors focus even more heavily on compliance and a number of positive Court decisions put to rest questionable legal theories upon which these FDCPA cases relied.  However, it is only a matter of time before new theories arise. In the latest episode of the Debt Collection Drill, Moss & Barnett attorneys John Rossman http://www.lawmoss.com/john-rossman/ [http://www.lawmoss.com/john-rossman/] and Mike Poncin http://www.lawmoss.com/michael-s-poncin/ [http://www.lawmoss.com/michael-s-poncin/] explore how the FDCPA landscape shifted and identify ways in which collectors can avoid being caught in the inevitable next wave of FDCPA lawsuits.

First party and early-out servicing provides an enhanced customer service experience and greater responsiveness for consumers.  These qualities make first party and early-out servicing beneficial for creditors as well as consumers.  However, as the prevalence of this type of servicing increases, consumer attorneys and regulators seek to find ways to apply traditional debt collection laws and statutes to first party and early-out servicing. In the latest episode of the Debt Collection Drill, Moss & Barnett attorneys John Rossman http://www.lawmoss.com/john-rossman/ [http://www.lawmoss.com/john-rossman/], Mike Poncin http://www.lawmoss.com/michael-s-poncin/ [http://www.lawmoss.com/michael-s-poncin/] and Dave Cherner http://www.lawmoss.com/david-d-cherner/ [http://www.lawmoss.com/david-d-cherner/] discuss risks for first party and early out servicing arising from the FTC DeMayo Opinion, discuss specific State licensing and disclosure requirements (24 States and jurisdictions may require early-out servicers to obtain a collection agency license) and also address possible CFPB rulemaking to modify the definition of default, as determined by meetings that Mr. Rossman and Mr. Cherner have attended with the CFPB through the Consumer Relations Consortium http://www.crconsortium.org/ [http://www.crconsortium.org/]

The issue of whether debt collectors may email consumers is finally being given serious consideration by regulators. A prescient article written by Rozanne Andersen in 2011 is the most comprehensive document on the topic of debt collection emails.  New York regulators took the next step toward opening up email to debt collection communication with the rules it published in 2015.  Earlier this year, the CFPB addressed the use of email for debt collection communications in several places in its Outline of Proposed Rules. In the most recent episode of the Debt Collection Drill podcast, attorneys John Rossman and Mike Poncin discuss the current legal landscape regarding the use of email for debt collection communication and provide specific steps for collection agencies to begin the use of email to contact consumers.

Tom and Steve will take a look back at our program and how it evolved, share some thoughts on programming highlights, and discuss Steve's take on the show from the perspective of a non-lawyer. On behalf of the 180 employees of Moss & Barnett, here's a salute to WCCO Radio for inviting us to join their family of broadcasters and to express our very special thanks to all of our listeners. We look forward to being with you one last time for "Minnesota Law: The Finale."

This is a best of Minnesota Law that first aired in April 2010. Tom Shroyer hosted Moss and Barnett business attorney Tony Marick on the topic of "Private Equity and Private Placements."