Quick analysis: October was a mixed bag compared to September: FDPCA was down by 10.3%, FCRA up by a whopping 25.4% and TCPA essentially broke even with 450 cases, up just one from September’s 249.

Even though TCPA was unmoved, it did reach an important milestone with another one very likely imminent. It smashed through the 4000 barrier for the first time ever with 4164 suits filed so far in 2016. That is up 33.7% from 2015’s 3115 filings at this same time.

But, if TCPA filings continue at the same rate they have been going, it is on track to also smash through the 5000 filings barrier by the end of the year.

Think about that for a while…

In other YTD news, FDCPA seems pretty locked in to a 12%ish decline over 2015, effectively unmoved from there since summer with the decline consistently landing in the range of 10.9% to 13.2% each month since June. And FCRA seems to be headed for an increase of 8%-10%, if current trends hold.

There are lots of interesting data points buried in the stats below, for those interested in digging them out. Enjoy!

Comparisons: Current Period: Previous Period: Previous Year Comp:
Oct 01, 2016
Oct 31, 2016
Sep 01, 2016
Sep 30, 2016
Oct 01, 2015
Oct 31, 2015
CFPB Complaints  3103 3498 -11.3% 3055 1.6%
FDCPA lawsuits  832 928 -10.3% 1006 -17.3%
FCRA lawsuits  355 283 25.4% 446 -20.4%
TCPA lawsuits  450 449 0.2% 467 -3.6%
YTD CFPB Complaints  33328 34621 -3.7%
YTD FDCPA lawsuits  8861 10099 -12.3%
YTD FCRA lawsuits  3285 3008 9.2%
YTD TCPA lawsuits  4164 3115 33.7%

 

Complaint Statistics:

3103 consumers filed CFPB complaints against debt collectors and about 1306 consumers filed lawsuits under consumer statutes from Oct 01, 2016 to Oct 31, 2016. Here is an approximate breakdown:

  • 3103 CFPB Complaints
  • 832 FDCPA, 139 Class Action (16.7%)
  • 450 TCPA, 91 Class Action (20.2%)
  • 355 FCRA, 39 Class Action (11.0%)

Litigation Summary (scroll down for CFPB data):

  • Of those cases, there were about 1306 unique plaintiffs (including multiple plaintiffs in one suit).
  • Of those plaintiffs, about 468, or (36%), had sued under consumer statutes before.
  • Combined, those plaintiffs have filed about 1858 lawsuits since 2001
  • Actions were filed in 159 different US District Court branches.
  • About 872 different collection firms and creditors were sued.

The top courts where lawsuits were filed:

  • 66 Lawsuits: Illinois Northern District Court – Chicago
  • 59 Lawsuits: California Northern District Court – San Francisco
  • 48 Lawsuits: New York Eastern District Court – Central Islip
  • 47 Lawsuits: Georgia Northern District Court – Atlanta
  • 46 Lawsuits: California Central District Court – Los Angeles
  • 38 Lawsuits: Florida Middle District Court – Tampa
  • 35 Lawsuits: New York Eastern District Court – Brooklyn
  • 34 Lawsuits: Nevada District Court – Las Vegas
  • 34 Lawsuits: Pennsylvania Eastern District Court – Philadelphia
  • 32 Lawsuits: California Northern District Court – Oakland

The most active consumer attorneys were:

  • Representing 72 Consumers: ELLIOT WAYNE GALE
  • Representing 65 Consumers: CRAIG B SANDERS
  • Representing 53 Consumers: SCOTT JOSEPH SAGARIA
  • Representing 52 Consumers: CHRIS R MILTENBERGER
  • Representing 43 Consumers: SCOTT MATTHEW JOHNSON
  • Representing 38 Consumers: JOSEPH BRIAN ANGELO
  • Representing 37 Consumers: TODD M FRIEDMAN
  • Representing 37 Consumers: MATTHEW THOMAS BERRY
  • Representing 27 Consumers: AMY LYNN BENNECOFF GINSBURG
  • Representing 27 Consumers: SERGEI LEMBERG

Statistics Year to Date:
13414 total lawsuits for 2016, including:

  • 8861 FDCPA
  • 3285 FCRA
  • 4164 TCPA

Number of Unique Plaintiffs for 2016: 12309 (including multiple plaintiffs in one suit)

The most active consumer attorneys of the year:

  • Representing 388 Consumers: TODD M FRIEDMAN
  • Representing 326 Consumers: MATTHEW THOMAS BERRY
  • Representing 252 Consumers: CRAIG B SANDERS
  • Representing 251 Consumers: DAVID H KRIEGER
  • Representing 245 Consumers: ADRIAN ROBERT BACON
  • Representing 240 Consumers: PAUL JONATHAN SIEG
  • Representing 225 Consumers: SERGEI LEMBERG
  • Representing 223 Consumers: ELLIOT WAYNE GALE
  • Representing 220 Consumers: AHMAD TAYSEER SULAIMAN
  • Representing 219 Consumers: DAVID SCOTT KLAIN

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

There were 3103 complaints filed against debt collectors from Oct 01, 2016 to Oct 31, 2016.

Total number of debt collectors complained about: 728

The types of debt behind the complaints were:

  • 1022 Other (i.e. phone, health club, etc.) (33%)
  • 607 I do not know (20%)
  • 543 Credit card (17%)
  • 538 Medical (17%)
  • 120 Payday loan (4%)
  • 92 Mortgage (3%)
  • 88 Auto (3%)
  • 48 Non-federal student loan (2%)
  • 45 Federal student loan (1%)

Here is a breakdown of complaints:

  • 1227 Cont’d attempts collect debt not owed (40%)
  • 931 Disclosure verification of debt (30%)
  • 351 Communication tactics (11%)
  • 222 False statements or representation (7%)
  • 219 Improper contact or sharing of info (7%)
  • 153 Taking/threatening an illegal action (5%)

The top five subissues were:

  • 701 Not given enough info to verify debt (23%)
  • 690 Debt is not mine (22%)
  • 363 Debt was paid (12%)
  • 203 Frequent or repeated calls (7%)
  • 187 Right to dispute notice not received (6%)

The top states complaints were filed from are:

  • 387 Complaints: CA
  • 332 Complaints: TX
  • 317 Complaints: FL
  • 208 Complaints: GA
  • 189 Complaints: NY
  • 109 Complaints: NJ
  • 107 Complaints: NC
  • 98 Complaints: PA
  • 90 Complaints: IL
  • 88 Complaints: OH

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

  • 3103 (100%)

This includes 2903 (94%) timely responses to complaints, and 200 (6%) untimely responses.

Of the company responses, consumers accepted 0 (%) of them, disputed 466 (15%) of them, and 2637 (85%) were N\A.

The top five days for complaints were:

  • 178 Complaints: Wed, 10/05/2016
  • 161 Complaints: Tue, 10/11/2016
  • 157 Complaints: Mon, 10/03/2016
  • 151 Complaints: Wed, 10/12/2016
  • 150 Complaints: Wed, 10/26/2016

 

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.