# FDCPA — Fair Debt Collection Practices Act

**15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq.** — passed 1977, last substantially amended
by Dodd-Frank (2010) and Reg F (CFPB, effective 2021).

## Who is covered

**Debt collector** (§ 1692a(6)):

- Any person whose principal business is collecting debts
- Any person who regularly collects debts owed to another
- Includes **debt buyers** whose principal business is purchasing
  defaulted debt and collecting on it (*Henson v. Santander* (2017)
  narrowed this, but the "principal business" prong still sweeps in
  most debt buyers; see also *McAdory v. M.N.S. & Assocs.* (9th Cir.
  2020))
- Excludes **original creditors** collecting their own debt

**Consumer debt** (§ 1692a(5)): debt incurred primarily for personal,
family, or household purposes. Business debt is excluded.

**Communication** (§ 1692a(2)): conveying information regarding the
debt, directly or indirectly, through any medium — letter, phone,
court filing, text message, email.

## Key prohibitions

### § 1692e — False or misleading representations

The debt collector may not use any false, deceptive, or misleading
representation. The section lists 16 specific violations; the most
common in litigation:

- **§ 1692e(2)(A)** — false character, amount, or legal status of the
  debt (e.g., adding unauthorized fees; suing on a debt already paid)
- **§ 1692e(5)** — threat of action that cannot legally be taken or
  that is not intended to be taken (e.g., threatening garnishment
  without judgment; filing suit after the SOL has run)
- **§ 1692e(8)** — communicating credit information known to be false
  (e.g., reporting disputed debt without noting dispute)
- **§ 1692e(9)** — use or distribution of documents simulating legal
  process
- **§ 1692e(10)** — any false representation or deceptive means (catch-
  all)
- **§ 1692e(11)** — failing to disclose in communications that the
  debt collector is attempting to collect a debt and that any
  information obtained will be used for that purpose ("mini-Miranda")

### § 1692f — Unfair or unconscionable practices

- **§ 1692f(1)** — collection of any amount not expressly authorized by
  the agreement creating the debt or permitted by law (e.g., collecting
  a debt the statute of limitations bars, or collecting charges not
  in the original contract)
- § 1692f(6) — threatening nonjudicial action to dispossess property
- § 1692f(8) — language or symbol on an envelope other than the
  collector's address

### § 1692g — Validation of debts

Within **five days** of the initial communication, the debt collector
must send a written notice containing:

1. The amount of the debt
2. The name of the creditor
3. A statement that unless the consumer disputes the debt within 30
   days, the debt is assumed valid
4. A statement that if the consumer disputes in writing, the
   collector will obtain verification
5. A statement that on request, the collector will provide the name
   of the original creditor

If the consumer disputes within 30 days, **collection activity must
cease** until verification is provided.

### § 1692c — Communication restrictions

- No communication at unusual times (before 8 AM / after 9 PM local
  time) or places, unless consumer consents
- No communication at the consumer's workplace if the employer
  prohibits it
- No contact with consumer if represented by counsel
- Consumer may send "cease communication" letter — all contact must
  stop except to confirm cessation or to notify of a specific remedy

## Damages and remedies — § 1692k

**Civil liability:**

- **Actual damages** — emotional distress, lost time, out-of-pocket
  costs
- **Additional statutory damages** — up to **$1,000 per action** (not
  per violation) in individual actions
- **Class actions** — up to the lesser of $500,000 or 1% of the
  collector's net worth
- **Attorney fees and costs** — recoverable if the consumer prevails
  on any claim

**Statute of limitations**: **one year** from the date of the violation
(§ 1692k(d)). *Rotkiske v. Klemm* (2019) confirmed discovery rule does
not apply in FDCPA absent fraud.

**Forum**: federal district court or state court of competent
jurisdiction.

**Bona fide error defense** (§ 1692k(c)): collector is not liable if
it shows the violation was unintentional and resulted from a bona
fide error notwithstanding reasonable procedures. **Mistakes of law
are not covered** (*Jerman v. Carlisle* (2010)).

## Applying FDCPA in Washington debt-buyer defense

A defendant sued by a debt buyer typically raises FDCPA as a
**counterclaim** in the state collection action, paired with a
Washington CPA claim. Typical sequence:

1. **Identify the collector** — Is the plaintiff a "debt collector"
   under § 1692a(6)? Most debt buyers (Midland, LVNV, Velocity,
   Portfolio Recovery, etc.) qualify.
2. **Identify a specific provision violated** — e.g., § 1692e(2)(A)
   for claiming a balance that includes unauthorized charges;
   § 1692f(1) for collecting outside the contract; § 1692e(8) for
   misreporting disputed debt.
3. **Tie the violation to a specific fact** — quote the offending
   letter, complaint allegation, or telephone log. Attach as exhibit.
4. **Plead damages** — statutory up to $1,000, actual if any,
   attorney fees (available to pro se in some circuits; WA state
   courts generally do not award pro se fees under FDCPA — verify
   current Ninth Circuit rule).
5. **Pair with a WA CPA claim** — see `wa-consumer-protection.md`.
   Per-violation or per se via RCW 19.16.440.

## Common debt-buyer FDCPA violations

| Violation | Section |
|-----------|---------|
| Suing on time-barred debt | § 1692e(2)(A), § 1692e(5), § 1692f(1) |
| Misstating principal / interest / fees | § 1692e(2)(A) |
| Filing suit without documentation required by state law | § 1692f(1) |
| Claiming balance after dispute without validation | § 1692g(b) |
| Not disclosing "debt collector" status in pleadings | § 1692e(11) |
| Filing with false affidavits (robosigning) | § 1692e(2)(A), § 1692e(9), § 1692e(10) |
| Reporting disputed debt to credit bureaus without flag | § 1692e(8) |

## Ninth Circuit highlights

- **Tourgeman v. Collins Financial** (9th Cir. 2014) — false
  representations in a complaint can violate § 1692e even if no
  consumer sees them
- **McCollough v. Johnson, Rogers & Bauer** (9th Cir. 2011) — attorney
  fees under FDCPA when consumer prevails
- **Donohue v. Quick Collect** (9th Cir. 2010) — collecting statutory
  prejudgment interest not provided by contract violates § 1692f(1)

## References

- Full statute: https://www.consumerfinance.gov/rules-policy/regulations/1006/
- CFPB Regulation F: 12 CFR 1006