Quick analysis: February litigation against debt collectors picked up a bit from January\’s across-the-board decline, but (surprisingly) TCPA is still lagging significantly from both last month (down 13.4%) and this time last year (down 46.1%).

Both FDCPA and FCRA have increased over last month (up 10.1% and 28.2%, respectively) and this time last year (up 5.9% and 22.7%, respectively).

One word of caution… the overall numbers are still pretty small and it is early in the year (with only two months of data), so it is premature to draw significant conclusions from what appears to be a positive trend in TCPA and negative trends in FDCPA and FCRA.

Class actions were robust for FDPA last month at 17.3% of all cases, and average for TCPA (8.1%) and FCRA (9.3%). Repeat filers represented about 31% of all February litigation.

On to CFPB complaints against debt collectors. As of publication, 3380 complaints were filed against 830 different debt collectors in February. That is up 3.1% over January , and will likely continue to edge up as more complaints go public.

Comparisons: Current Period: Previous Period: Previous Year Comp:
  Feb 01 – 28, 2015 Jan 01 – 31, 2015 Feb 01 – 28, 2014
 
CFPB Complaints  3380 3278 3.1% 3369 0.3%
 
FDCPA lawsuits  842 765 10.1% 795 5.9%
FCRA lawsuits  227 177 28.2% 185 22.7%
TCPA lawsuits  123 142 -13.4% 228 -46.1%
 
YTD CFPB Complaints  6658 6649 0.1%
YTD FDCPA lawsuits  1607 1521 5.7%
YTD FCRA lawsuits  404 385 4.9%
YTD TCPA lawsuits  265 441 -39.9%

Complaint Statistics:

3380 consumers filed CFPB complaints against debt collectors and about 1045 consumers filed lawsuits under consumer statutes in Feb 2015. Here is an approximate breakdown:

  • 3380 CFPB Complaints
  • 842 FDCPA, 146 Class Action (17.3%)
  • 123 TCPA, 10 Class Action (8.1%)
  • 227 FCRA, 21 Class Action (9.3%)

Litigation Summary (scroll down for CFPB data):

  • Of those cases, there were about 1045 unique plaintiffs (including multiple plaintiffs in one suit).
  • Of those plaintiffs, about 329, or (31%), had sued under consumer statutes before.
  • Combined, those plaintiffs have filed about 1285 lawsuits since 2001
  • Actions were filed in 151 different US District Court branches.
  • About 719 different collection firms and creditors were sued.

The top courts where lawsuits were filed:

  • 82 Lawsuits: Illinois Northern District Court – Chicago
  • 57 Lawsuits: New York Eastern District Court – Brooklyn
  • 54 Lawsuits: Pennsylvania Eastern District Court – Philadelphia
  • 36 Lawsuits: California Central District Court – Los Angeles
  • 34 Lawsuits: New Jersey District Court – Newark
  • 33 Lawsuits: Missouri Eastern District Court – St. Louis – Eastern Division
  • 28 Lawsuits: Florida Middle District Court – Tampa
  • 27 Lawsuits: Nevada District Court – Las Vegas
  • 26 Lawsuits: Indiana Southern District Court – Indianapolis
  • 23 Lawsuits: Minnesota District Court – Dmn

The most active consumer attorneys were:

  • Representing 27 Consumers: SERGEI LEMBERG
  • Representing 22 Consumers: DAVID J PHILIPPS
  • Representing 21 Consumers: DAVID H KRIEGER
  • Representing 20 Consumers: ANGIE K ROBERTSON
  • Representing 16 Consumers: HASSAN ALI ZAVAREEI
  • Representing 16 Consumers: AMY LYNN BENNECOFF GINSBURG
  • Representing 15 Consumers: MARK D MAILMAN
  • Representing 15 Consumers: DAVID MICHAEL MENDITTO
  • Representing 15 Consumers: JEFFREY SCOTT HYSLIP
  • Representing 15 Consumers: DANNY HOREN

Statistics Year to Date:
1926 total lawsuits for 2015, including:

  • 1607 FDCPA
  • 404 FCRA
  • 265 TCPA

Number of Unique Plaintiffs for 2015: 1938 (including multiple plaintiffs in one suit)

The most active consumer attorneys of the year:

  • Representing 55 Consumers: SERGEI LEMBERG
  • Representing 39 Consumers: DANIEL A EDELMAN
  • Representing 37 Consumers: ADAM JON FISHBEIN
  • Representing 35 Consumers: JAMES O LATTURNER
  • Representing 35 Consumers: CATHLEEN M COMBS
  • Representing 31 Consumers: JOHN D BLYTHIN
  • Representing 31 Consumers: MARK A ELDRIDGE
  • Representing 31 Consumers: SHPETIM ADEMI
  • Representing 30 Consumers: DAVID H KRIEGER
  • Representing 29 Consumers: DAVID J PHILIPPS

——————————————————————————————————-
CFPB Complaint Statistics:

There were 3380 complaints filed against debt collectors in Feb 2015.

Total number of debt collectors complained about: 830

The types of debt behind the complaints were:

  • 1026 Other (phone, health club, etc.) (30%)
  • 780 Unknown (23%)
  • 670 Credit card (20%)
  • 479 Medical (14%)
  • 179 Payday loan (5%)
  • 73 Auto (2%)
  • 69 Mortgage (2%)
  • 54 Federal student loan (2%)
  • 50 Non-federal student loan (1%)

Here is a breakdown of complaints:

  • 1522 Cont’d attempts collect debt not owed (45%)
  • 590 Disclosure verification of debt (17%)
  • 562 Communication tactics (17%)
  • 278 False statements or representation (8%)
  • 252 Improper contact or sharing of info (7%)
  • 176 Taking/threatening an illegal action (5%)

The top five subissues were:

  • 1007 Debt is not mine (30%)
  • 391 Debt was paid (12%)
  • 370 Not given enough info to verify debt (11%)
  • 330 Frequent or repeated calls (10%)
  • 215 Attempted to collect wrong amount (6%)

The top states complaints were filed from are:

  • 435 Complaints: CA
  • 304 Complaints: FL
  • 285 Complaints: TX
  • 196 Complaints: NY
  • 130 Complaints: OH
  • 128 Complaints: IL
  • 125 Complaints: NJ
  • 125 Complaints: GA
  • 111 Complaints: PA
  • 95 Complaints: TN

The status of the month’s complaints are as follows:

  • 2226 Closed with explanation (66%)
  • 602 Closed with non-monetary relief (18%)
  • 219 In progress (6%)
  • 158 Closed (5%)
  • 135 Untimely response (4%)
  • 40 Closed with monetary relief (1%)

This includes 3123 (92%) timely responses to complaints, and 257 (8%) untimely responses.

Of the company responses, consumers accepted 0 (%) of them, disputed 325 (10%) of them, and 3055 (90%) were N\A.

The top five days for complaints were:

  • 182 Complaints: Wed, 02/18/2015
  • 178 Complaints: Wed, 02/25/2015
  • 177 Complaints: Tue, 02/24/2015
  • 174 Complaints: Thu, 02/19/2015
  • 168 Complaints: Thu, 02/05/2015

API Access


We offer two powerful APIs to businesses that communicate with consumers:

  • The primary Litigious Consumer Scrub uses a combination of name, geography (and optionally SSN) to identify consumers who have filed lawsuits in the past.
  • The Litigious Consumer Phone Scrub pulls every phone number from our proprietary database of litigants and runs your phones against ours.

These APIs allow you to check your data against our database on the fly. Clients love using this to handle risk management without missing a beat in their daily workflow.

Workers Comp Scrub


Workers Comp-inspired FDCPA lawsuits are growing aggressively, particularly in Florida. Only WebRecon can tell you who in your database may have a Florida Worker’s Comp case filed that could trigger litigation against you.

You can’t stop 100% of all lawsuits, but if you collect medical in Florida and you don’t have a process in place to show the court that you have a way to check every file against the Workers Comp database, then you have lost the case before it even begins.

Knock these suits out of the park with the Workers Comp Scrub.

Our Monthly Client Newsletter with The Litigant Hotsheet


Anyone can get our guest newsletter, but only clients get the version with the Litigant Hotsheet –  identifying the most active consumer Plaintiffs filing suit in jurisdictions around the country each month. Grab a coffee, shut your door and open your database to make sure you are doing all you can to stay safe.

Individual Vendor Consumer Complaint Search


Just like Vendor Monitoring, but without the monitoring. Search any business’s history of consumer complaints (Litigation, CFPB, BBB, State AG) with the click of a button! Great for on-the-fly gut checks of the companies you do business with.

Vendor Monitoring


Through vicarious liability, you can be held accountable for the bad behavior of your vendors. If they abuse consumers, for all intents and purposes, so do you. This is a big freakin’ deal!

But fear not, friend. WebRecon can track consumer litigation, CFPB, BBB and State AG Office complaints against the companies you do business with.

When a new complaint of any kind is filed against any of the companies you are monitoring, we’ll automatically push a report out to you with all of the publicly available details so you can react accordingly and if necessary, protect your interests.

The Litigious Consumer Phone Scrub


Would you knowingly dial a number attached to a consumer with a history of litigation? Of course not.

But thousands of companies do just that, every single day. If you’d like to know who they are, simply review the court dockets. They are the ones getting sued the most.

Sure, you can stop dialing consumers. But your marketing and operations teams might not be too excited about that plan.

Another idea? Identify the consumers most likely to sue you, based on previous litigation histories, and just don’t call them.

Identify high-risk phones quickly & easily, before you expose yourself to unnecessary risk.

Litigation Context Search


This is really cool.

Our primary search engine is really designed to search for parties to litigation. Need to know more about a consumer plaintiff? That’s easy. Defendant? Check. Lawyer? No problem.

But if you need to find all 1099C lawsuits filed in July 2020… not so much.

Which is why we developed the Context Search. We have pulled out and indexed the full text from over 140k consumer lawsuits and made them available to you in a search engine, with more than 1000 new lawsuits added each month. Use it to search the text of filed litigation so you can easily identify those hard-to-define trends and cases worth following.

Individual Search Engine


Instantly and easily search our proprietary database for any lawsuit participant – Plaintiff, Defendant or Attorney.

In the results, we’ll show you the full consumer litigation history of any participant, including the “docket data” (who, what, why, where, when) and – in many cases – we can even provide a copy of their actual filed lawsuits.

You can also search by phone, date range, federal/state, class action, court, statute, etc. We offer a ton of flexibility to get you the exact search result you are looking for.

The Litigant Alert Ongoing Monitoring Process


Just like our one-time batch process, but without the whole “one time” thing.

When one of your consumers files new litigation against anyone in the future, you should be the first to know. Our monitoring service can make that happen.

WebRecon can monitor your entire database (or any segment of it) for future instances of consumer litigation filed by the very consumers you are working with, right now!

It is simple to add new consumers to the watchlist, remove inactive accounts, download full reports, etc.

Best of all, we only charge you for the volume of your monitoring database – not the frequency of the searches. Search daily, weekly, every Tuesday and Friday, the 15th of each month, whatever – it is totally up to you! You won’t pay a penny more.

The Litigant Alert One-Time Batch Process


This is our flagship service. Find out why hundreds of companies won’t contact any consumers before running them through WebRecon’s Litigant Alert.

This process identifies consumers with a history of litigation quickly & easily. If they have ever filed lawsuits under FDCPA, TCPA, FCRA or similar statutes, you’ll find out here. 

WebRecon’s proprietary database is simply the most comprehensive collection of dangerous consumer litigation data in existence. 

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.