Supreme Court lets debt collection class-action suit proceed
Source: Reuters
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday allowed a class-action lawsuit against debt collector Encore Capital Group Inc to move forward, declining to hear its claim that such companies should be protected from state "usury" laws barring money-lending at unreasonably high interest rates.
The court left in place a May 2015 ruling by the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York that found that Encore's Midland Funding and Midland Credit Management units were not national banks with legal protection against state usury laws.
The class-action lawsuit was brought by a New York borrower named Saliha Madden who objected to the 27 percent annual interest rate she was being charged.
Debt collection companies typically buy debt from banks and other creditors for pennies on the dollar, then try to collect higher amounts from people who owe the debt.
[font size=1]-snip-[/font]
Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-debtcollectors-idUSKCN0ZD1RJ
World | Mon Jun 27, 2016 9:52am EDT
WASHINGTON | BY LAWRENCE HURLEY
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)Practically everything they tried to tell me was a violation of federal law.
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)to have woken up on our side this morning.
Igel
(35,337 posts)The SCOTUS is on their side, which they think is the side of the law. For some things there are biases and a desire to change how the democracy works and what the Constitution's meant for many a decade, but for the most part they just read the law and try to come up with adequately narrow and adequately reasonable interpretation given the text and, if that doesn't work, the legislative history (which includes what was said in the legislature, what politicians added after the debate closed, and the signing statement, if any).
Everything else is a result of the prism that we view the world through.
When there are 5-4 splits, my personal belief is that it's a cry for the House and Senate to revisit the law because it's unclear or can be warped easily from what was intended. Or somebody is trying to rewrite both history and culture to suit his/her own image. That is an oligarchy, and most people support the oligarchy when it suits them. Risky business, that--sort of like having alligators patrol your neighborhood to keep down the possum and rat population.
24601
(3,962 posts)Congress to legislate on an issue. In the area of debt collection, I'd support a remedy that cancels the debt when a jury decides that a collection agency was negligently abusive. If they are intentionally abusively, I'd mandate that the lender selling the debt or hiring the collection agency must pay the debtor twice the amount of the debt and that the collection agency must pay the debtor three times the amount of the debt.
Some may ask why hold the lender accountable. It's to ensure they remain engaged in the process and have a monetary stake in ensuring they sell a debt only to ethical individuals / firms and hire only those collection agencies that will follow the law.
too many split decisions. But at least we are on the right side of a few for a change.