Quick analysis: August… same as it ever was.

With one slight exception, August continued many of the patterns that have become common this year. That exception? FDCPA lawsuits snapped a five-month losing streak in terms of month-over-month filings. Even so, it was only with a 1.4% increase, and it wasn’t enough to break the YTD trend which still dropped a bit from 12.8% last month to 13.2% this month.

Beyond FDCPA, TCPA filings were down a bit (10.2%) from the previous month, but are still up 39.7% YTD. And FCRA filings were up a lot from the previous month (39.6%) and are up 19.4% YTD.

CFPB complaint filings had a robust month as well, up just over 30% from the previous month. That helps to knock the long-time YTD trend of complaints lagging around 10% behind last year to its lowest point of 7% down from this time last year.

Fun Facts:

  • For July 2016, 36% of all consumer litigation plaintiffs had sued at least once before under consumer litigation statutes.
  • About 958 different companies were sued, up 7.2% over the 894 last month. And 819 different debt collectors were complained about to the CFPB, about 14.5% higher than last month’s 715.
  • The percentage of suits filed as putative class actions were all over the board, with 16% for FDCPA, 20% for TCPA and only 6.9% for FCRA.
  • California attorney Elliot Wayne Gale represented the most consumers for the month with 56 and California attorney Todd M. Friedman had the most consumers YTD with 289.
Comparisons: Current Period: Previous Period: Previous Year Comp:
Aug 01, 2016
Aug 31, 2016
Jul 01, 2016
Jul 31, 2016
Aug 01, 2015
Aug 31, 2015
CFPB Complaints  3954 3026 30.7% 3619 9.3%
FDCPA lawsuits  844 832 1.4% 998 -15.4%
FCRA lawsuits  377 270 39.6% 321 17.4%
TCPA lawsuits  395 440 -10.2% 342 15.5%
YTD CFPB Complaints  26382 28372 -7.0%
YTD FDCPA lawsuits  7093 8170 -13.2%
YTD FCRA lawsuits  2639 2210 19.4%
YTD TCPA lawsuits  3254 2330 39.7%


Complaint Statistics:

3954 consumers filed CFPB complaints against debt collectors and about 1382 consumers filed lawsuits under consumer statutes from Aug 01, 2016 to Aug 31, 2016. Here is an approximate breakdown:

  • 3954 CFPB Complaints
  • 844 FDCPA, 135 Class Action (16.0%)
  • 395 TCPA, 79 Class Action (20.0%)
  • 377 FCRA, 26 Class Action (6.9%)

Litigation Summary (scroll down for CFPB data):

  • Of those cases, there were about 1382 unique plaintiffs (including multiple plaintiffs in one suit).
  • Of those plaintiffs, about 491, or (36%), had sued under consumer statutes before.
  • Combined, those plaintiffs have filed about 2700 lawsuits since 2001
  • Actions were filed in 160 different US District Court branches.
  • About 958 different collection firms and creditors were sued.

The top courts where lawsuits were filed:

  • 94 Lawsuits: Illinois Northern District Court – Chicago
  • 84 Lawsuits: California Central District Court – Los Angeles
  • 61 Lawsuits: California Northern District Court – San Jose
  • 60 Lawsuits: Georgia Northern District Court – Atlanta
  • 46 Lawsuits: Florida Middle District Court – Tampa
  • 46 Lawsuits: New York Eastern District Court – Brooklyn
  • 44 Lawsuits: Nevada District Court – Las Vegas
  • 37 Lawsuits: Florida Southern District Court – Fort Lauderdale
  • 36 Lawsuits: Pennsylvania Eastern District Court – Philadelphia
  • 35 Lawsuits: California Southern District Court – San Diego

The most active consumer attorneys were:

  • Representing 56 Consumers: ELLIOT WAYNE GALE
  • Representing 48 Consumers: MATTHEW THOMAS BERRY
  • Representing 39 Consumers: TODD M FRIEDMAN
  • Representing 31 Consumers: DAVID H KRIEGER
  • Representing 31 Consumers: JOHN D BLYTHIN
  • Representing 31 Consumers: ADAM KLEIN
  • Representing 28 Consumers: ADRIAN ROBERT BACON
  • Representing 26 Consumers: DAVID SCOTT KLAIN
  • Representing 25 Consumers: MOHAMMED OMAR BADWAN
  • Representing 25 Consumers: AHMAD TAYSEER SULAIMAN

Statistics Year to Date:
10714 total lawsuits for 2016, including:

  • 7093 FDCPA
  • 2639 FCRA
  • 3254 TCPA

Number of Unique Plaintiffs for 2016: 9980 (including multiple plaintiffs in one suit)

The most active consumer attorneys of the year:

  • Representing 289 Consumers: TODD M FRIEDMAN
  • Representing 255 Consumers: MATTHEW THOMAS BERRY
  • Representing 209 Consumers: DAVID H KRIEGER
  • Representing 200 Consumers: PAUL JONATHAN SIEG
  • Representing 193 Consumers: ADRIAN ROBERT BACON
  • Representing 192 Consumers: DAVID SCOTT KLAIN
  • Representing 177 Consumers: SERGEI LEMBERG
  • Representing 162 Consumers: MICHAEL JACOB WOOD
  • Representing 159 Consumers: NATHAN CHARLES VOLHEIM
  • Representing 159 Consumers: CELETHA CHATMAN

CFPB Complaint Statistics:

There were 3954 complaints filed against debt collectors from Aug 01, 2016 to Aug 31, 2016.

Total number of debt collectors complained about: 819

The types of debt behind the complaints were:

  • 1284 Other (i.e. phone, health club, etc.) (32%)
  • 875 Credit card (22%)
  • 738 I do not know (19%)
  • 574 Medical (15%)
  • 134 Mortgage (3%)
  • 121 Payday loan (3%)
  • 105 Auto (3%)
  • 67 Non-federal student loan (2%)
  • 56 Federal student loan (1%)

Here is a breakdown of complaints:

  • 1459 Cont’d attempts collect debt not owed (37%)
  • 1306 Disclosure verification of debt (33%)
  • 489 Communication tactics (12%)
  • 268 False statements or representation (7%)
  • 230 Improper contact or sharing of info (6%)
  • 202 Taking/threatening an illegal action (5%)

The top five subissues were:

  • 1044 Not given enough info to verify debt (26%)
  • 813 Debt is not mine (21%)
  • 422 Debt was paid (11%)
  • 292 Frequent or repeated calls (7%)
  • 210 Attempted to collect wrong amount (5%)

The top states complaints were filed from are:

  • 498 Complaints: CA
  • 437 Complaints: TX
  • 415 Complaints: FL
  • 224 Complaints: NY
  • 204 Complaints: GA
  • 137 Complaints: IL
  • 119 Complaints: OH
  • 107 Complaints: AZ
  • 106 Complaints: NJ
  • 105 Complaints: PA

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

  • 3954 (100%)

This includes 3637 (92%) timely responses to complaints, and 317 (8%) untimely responses.

Of the company responses, consumers accepted 0 (%) of them, disputed 527 (13%) of them, and 3427 (87%) were N\A.

The top five days for complaints were:

  • 248 Complaints: Thu, 08/11/2016
  • 208 Complaints: Mon, 08/29/2016
  • 202 Complaints: Tue, 08/16/2016
  • 201 Complaints: Tue, 08/23/2016
  • 186 Complaints: Tue, 08/09/2016


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.