Counter-claims By Collector Not Permitted

This folder examines the purposes and policies behind the federal statute.
Post Reply
David A. Szwak
Posts: 1974
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2006 11:19 pm

Counter-claims By Collector Not Permitted

Post by David A. Szwak »

In FDCPA litigation brought against the debt collector, the collector normally may not assert a counterclaim for either the underlying debt or for bad faith. Sparrow v. Mazda American Credit, --- F.Supp.2d ----, 2005 WestLaw 18459 (U.S.D.C. E.D.Cal. 2005)(Although the court found that it had supplemental jurisdiction over the collector’s counterclaims for the underlying debt, the court declined pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1367(c)(4)to exercise supplemental jurisdiction because of the chilling affect it would have on litigants pursuing their rights under the FDCPA.) Peterson v. United Accounts, Inc., 638 F.2d 1134 (8th Cir. 1981); Evans v. American Credit Sys., 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22433 (U.S.D.C. Neb. 2003); Hart v. Clayton-Parker and Assoc., 869 F.Supp. 774 (U.S.D.C. Ariz. 1994); Harbin v. Folder, 704 F.Supp. 355 (U.S.D.C. N.D.N.Y. 1988); Leatherwood v. Universal Business Service Co., 115 FRAT 48 (U.S.D.C. N.D.N.Y. 1987); Gutshall v. Bailey & Associates, 1991 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 12153 (U.S.D.C. N.D.Ill. 1991); Venes v. Professional Service Bureau, Inc., 353 N.W.2d 671 (Minn. App. 1984) (is permissive).
Post Reply

Return to “FDCPA: Purposes and Policies”