Capital One Robocall Lawsuit Alleges State and Federal Violations

A lawsuit has been filed against Capital One alleging the bank has violated the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) and the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act (FCCPA).

Plaintiff Pamela M. filed the Capital One robocall lawsuit against the bank after she received multiple phone calls on her cellular telephone in an attempt to collect a debt.

In one phone call she received, Pamela stated that she received an automated message telling her to remain on the line so she could speak with a representative.

She claims she spoke with a Capital One representative directly at that time “and demanded that Defendant cease placing calls to her aforementioned cellular telephone number.”

During that phone call, Pamela said she “expressly revoked any express consent Defendant may have had for placement of telephone calls to Plaintiff’s aforementioned cellular telephone number by the use of an automatic telephone dialing system or a pre-recorded or artificial voice.”

Following her conversation with a Capital One agent, Pamela states in her Capitol One robocall lawsuit that each call she received from the bank thereafter was done so without her express permission and each subsequent call was “knowing and willful.”

“Despite actual knowledge of their wrongdoing, the Defendant continued the campaign of abuse, calling the Plaintiff despite not having [her] express permission to call [her] aforementioned cellular telephone number,” the Capital One robocall lawsuit reads.

Capital One Robocall Lawsuit Alleges Nearly 300 Unwanted Calls

From December 2014 through about February 2016, Pamela alleges that she received approximately 300 phone calls to her cellular telephone number from Capital One.

“Defendant intentionally harass and abuse Plaintiff on numerous occasions by calling several times in the same hour, during one day, and on back-to-back days, with such frequency as can reasonably be expected to harass,” the Capital One robocall lawsuit reads.

As result of receiving each of these calls allegedly placed by Capital One, Pamela claims she suffered injury by having her cellular telephone line filled with unwelcome calls “making the phone unavailable for legitimate callers or outgoing calls while the phone was ringing from the Defendant’s call.”

Additionally, Pamela said she suffered injury due to the unnecessary expenditure of her time. “For calls she answered, the time she spent on the call was unnecessarily as she repeatedly asked for the calls to stop. Even for unanswered calls, the Plaintiff had to waste time to deal with this call notifications and call logs that reflected the unwanted calls. “

She also claims these calls were a nuisance and annoyance, and these calls used up the battery of her cell phone and was a form of trespassing to her chattle (personal possession).

Pamela alleges two counts against the bank in her Capital One robocall lawsuit.

Pamela states that Capital One violated the TCPA willfully with each autodial call placed to her after she expressly notified the bank that she wished for the calls to cease.

The Capital One robocall lawsuit also alleges a violation of the FCCPA by willfully communicating with her “with such frequency is can reasonably be expected to harass” her.

The plaintiff is demanding a trial by jury and is seeking statutory damages, punitive damages, actual damages, costs, interest, attorneys’ fees and an enjoinder to stop any of these allegations from continuing.

The Capitol One Robocall Lawsuit is Case No. 8:16-cv-02581, in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Tampa Division.

Join a Free TCPA Class Action Lawsuit Investigation

If you were contacted on your cell phone by a company via an unsolicited text message (text spam) or prerecorded voice message (robocall), you may be eligible for compensation under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.

Get a Free Case Evaluation Now