Start a Free Trial

Quick analysis: What’s up with CFPB Complaints?

March was a robust month in consumer complaints, with FDCPA, TCPA and FCRA all easily exceeding February and keeping us within a percent or two of last year’s numbers – with the exception of this year’s second breakout month for FCRA (there have only been three months so far!) setting it more than 50% ahead of last month and almost 20% ahead of where we were last year.

The real story, however, seems to be in March’s CFPB complaint numbers. With over 4500 complaints filed against debt collectors and credit reporting agencies, we are 14.1% ahead of Feb and 25.3% ahead of where we were at this time last year. With the threat of severe CFPB reform on the horizon, are people starting to worry that they may lose their opportunity to have their voices heard?

Back to litigation, putative class actions are about normal with 15.8% of FDCPA, 20.9% of TCPA and only 8.9% of FCRA lawsuits filed that way.

About 34% of all plaintiffs who filed in February had filed at least once before.

And finally, Atlanta attorney Matthew Thomas Berry takes the crown for representing the most consumer plaintiffs (49) in March, while Los Angeles attorney Todd M. Friedman retains the crown for representing the most consumers year-to-date (137).

Comparisons: Current Period: Previous Period: Previous Year Comp:
Mar 01, 2017
Mar 31, 2017		 Feb 01, 2017
Feb 28, 2017		 Mar 01, 2016
Mar 31, 2016
CFPB Complaints  4544 3982 14.1% 3580 26.9%
FDCPA lawsuits  941 828 13.6% 1011 -6.9%
FCRA lawsuits  406 265 53.2% 341 19.1%
TCPA lawsuits  430 376 14.4% 472 -8.9%
YTD CFPB Complaints  12293 9809 25.3%
YTD FDCPA lawsuits  2591 2617 -1.0%
YTD FCRA lawsuits  1087 910 19.5%
YTD TCPA lawsuits  1208 1232 -1.9%

 

Complaint Statistics:

4544 consumers filed CFPB complaints against debt collectors and about 1509 consumers filed lawsuits under consumer statutes from Mar 01, 2017 to Mar 31, 2017. Here is an approximate breakdown:

  • 4544 CFPB Complaints
  • 941 FDCPA, 149 Class Action (15.8%)
  • 430 TCPA, 90 Class Action (20.9%)
  • 406 FCRA, 36 Class Action (8.9%)

Litigation Summary (scroll down for CFPB data):

  • Of those cases, there were about 1509 unique plaintiffs (including multiple plaintiffs in one suit).
  • Of those plaintiffs, about 510, or (34%), had sued under consumer statutes before.
  • Combined, those plaintiffs have filed about 3353 lawsuits since 2001
  • Actions were filed in 160 different US District Court branches.
  • About 974 different collection firms and creditors were sued.

The top courts where lawsuits were filed:

  • 102 Lawsuits: Illinois Northern District Court – Chicago
  • 75 Lawsuits: Georgia Northern District Court – Atlanta
  • 71 Lawsuits: New York Eastern District Court – Brooklyn
  • 62 Lawsuits: California Central District Court – Los Angeles
  • 56 Lawsuits: Pennsylvania Eastern District Court – Philadelphia
  • 55 Lawsuits: Nevada District Court – Las Vegas
  • 48 Lawsuits: Florida Middle District Court – Tampa
  • 46 Lawsuits: New York Eastern District Court – Central Islip
  • 42 Lawsuits: California Southern District Court – San Diego
  • 35 Lawsuits: Wisconsin Eastern District Court – Milwaukee

The most active consumer attorneys were:

  • Representing 49 Consumers: MATTHEW THOMAS BERRY
  • Representing 42 Consumers: CRAIG B SANDERS
  • Representing 42 Consumers: TODD M FRIEDMAN
  • Representing 40 Consumers: AHMAD TAYSEER SULAIMAN
  • Representing 34 Consumers: AMY LYNN BENNECOFF GINSBURG
  • Representing 34 Consumers: MOHAMMED OMAR BADWAN
  • Representing 33 Consumers: NATHAN CHARLES VOLHEIM
  • Representing 32 Consumers: DAVID H KRIEGER
  • Representing 30 Consumers: ADRIAN ROBERT BACON
  • Representing 30 Consumers: JOHN D BLYTHIN

Statistics Year to Date:
4112 total lawsuits for 2017, including:

  • 2591 FDCPA
  • 1087 FCRA
  • 1208 TCPA

Number of Unique Plaintiffs for 2017: 4072 (including multiple plaintiffs in one suit)

The most active consumer attorneys of the year:

  • Representing 137 Consumers: TODD M FRIEDMAN
  • Representing 123 Consumers: AHMAD TAYSEER SULAIMAN
  • Representing 113 Consumers: CRAIG B SANDERS
  • Representing 111 Consumers: DAVID H KRIEGER
  • Representing 111 Consumers: MATTHEW THOMAS BERRY
  • Representing 99 Consumers: MOHAMMED OMAR BADWAN
  • Representing 95 Consumers: NATHAN CHARLES VOLHEIM
  • Representing 93 Consumers: ADRIAN ROBERT BACON
  • Representing 72 Consumers: JOHN D BLYTHIN
  • Representing 71 Consumers: ELLIOT WAYNE GALE

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

There were 4544 complaints filed against debt collectors from Mar 01, 2017 to Mar 31, 2017.

Total number of debt collectors complained about: 926

The types of debt behind the complaints were:

  • 1556 Other (i.e. phone, health club, etc.) (34%)
  • 882 Medical (19%)
  • 824 Credit card (18%)
  • 758 I do not know (17%)
  • 149 Payday loan (3%)
  • 135 Auto (3%)
  • 94 Mortgage (2%)
  • 84 Non-federal student loan (2%)
  • 62 Federal student loan (1%)

Here is a breakdown of complaints:

  • 1890 Contd attempts collect debt not owed (42%)
  • 1373 Disclosure verification of debt (30%)
  • 466 Communication tactics (10%)
  • 347 False statements or representation (8%)
  • 256 Improper contact or sharing of info (6%)
  • 212 Taking/threatening an illegal action (5%)

The top five subissues were:

  • 1042 Debt is not mine (23%)
  • 1022 Not given enough info to verify debt (22%)
  • 554 Debt was paid (12%)
  • 296 Right to dispute notice not received (7%)
  • 273 Attempted to collect wrong amount (6%)

The top states complaints were filed from are:

  • 579 Complaints: CA
  • 533 Complaints: TX
  • 441 Complaints: FL
  • 304 Complaints: GA
  • 226 Complaints: NY
  • 161 Complaints: NC
  • 147 Complaints: IL
  • 142 Complaints: OH
  • 141 Complaints: NJ
  • 133 Complaints: PA

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

  • 4544 (100%)

This includes 4251 (94%) timely responses to complaints, and 293 (6%) untimely responses.

Of the company responses, consumers accepted 0 (%) of them, disputed 672 (15%) of them, and 3872 (85%) were N\A.

The top five days for complaints were:

  • 233 Complaints: Tue, 03/21/2017
  • 222 Complaints: Wed, 03/15/2017
  • 211 Complaints: Tue, 03/14/2017
  • 199 Complaints: Thu, 03/30/2017
  • 197 Complaints: Wed, 03/22/2017

 

WebRecon LLC is a part of the Americloud Holdings LLC family of companies. (855) WEB-RECON

© WebRecon LLC. All Rights Reserved.

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.