Monarch Recovery Hit With Debt Collection Lawsuit

Monarch Recovery Management Inc. was hit with a debt collection lawsuit alleging that it violated federal law through its debt collecting practices.

Indiana plaintiff Donald G. McDowell claims that Monarch Recovery used unscrupulous actions while collecting a debt. McDowell claims that due to the defendant’s illegal debt collecting practices, it caused him much stress and financial inconvenience.

Monarch is a debt collection agency that uses letters or telephone calls to notify consumers they are due for an upcoming debt. On Oct. 29, 2013, Monarch sent a letter to the plaintiff describing an alleged credit card debt, according to the debt collection lawsuit.

McDowell claims that Monarch illegally tried to collect his debt by sending him a computer-generated letter.

He argues that based on how the debt collection letter was written, and the time the letter was sent, Monarch had violated the Federal Debt Collection Protection Act (FDCPA).

Primarily, the letter misrepresents how much the McDowell truly owed, which counts as a direct violation of the debt collection laws, he says in the FDCPA lawsuit.

“As of the date of this letter, you owe $3,785.00. The amount due on the day you pay may be greater as interest may be added by the creditor. Hence, if you pay the total balance due shown above, an adjustment may be necessary after we receive your payment,” the letter said.

Due to the delay of mailing a traditional letter, the accrual rate of interest was different than what was perceived by the McDowell based on when he actually received this offer.

Essentially, because the letter had taken so long to reach the Indiana man, his lawyers argue that he was unable to file any countermeasures and that the company had deliberately tried to misrepresent the amount he owed. The letter also warned that even if the plaintiff paid the entire debt, when the debt had changed due to interest, then the debt was not considered settled because the remaining debt would remain.

In other words, Monarch’s settlement option given to McDowell was to encourage him to keep paying money under the impression that it would settle the debt, when it would keep increasing due to ambiguous terms of the interest rate. While the amount left in question after the debt was settled would be very little, Monarch could still continue to collect the remaining balance of the alleged debt, which was $1,892.50, plus any additional interest.

McDowell’s lawyers state that Monarch’s letter should have informed him how to obtain the exact settlement amount as the defendant would have normally received it, without being delayed by traditional mail.

Under the FDCPA, he claims in the debt collection lawsuit, Monarch’s action would count as sending consumers false statements and practicing deceptive debt collection strategies.

This occurs when the credit companies misrepresent the amount that is owed, attempt to collect a debt that is not owed, or falsely represent that they are debt collection attorneys or government representatives.

McDowell is suing Monarch for allegedly making this FDCPA violation, and is seeking statutory damages.

This Debt Collection Lawsuit is Donald G. McDowell v. Monarch Recovery Management Inc., Case No. 1:14-cv-00334-JVB-RBC, in the U.S. District Court of Northern Indiana, Fort Wayne Division.

Overview of FDCPA Policy

The FDCPA (Federal Debt Collection Protection Act) was established in 1978 to protect American consumers from unfair and aggressive debt collectors. This act also provided consumers the legal means to defend themselves from invalid or misrepresented debts, challenging how the agencies conducted their investigation.

If a debt collector is confirmed to have violated the FDCPA, the consumer is entitled to receive $1,000 in statutory damages, plus any actual damages that they may have actually suffered.

These violations include, but not limited to:

• False statements and deceptive practices
• Threats of lawsuits or arrest
• Threatening or deceptive letters
• Telephone calls early in the morning or late at night
• Communicating with third parties about your debt
• Collection of expired debts
• Attempts to collect debt that has already been discharged or settled
• Attempts to collect a debt you do not owe
• Improper debt collection after bankruptcy
• Failing to cease communications upon a written request to do so
• Reporting false information on your credit report

Join a Free Unfair Debt Collection Class Action Lawsuit Investigation

If a lender or debt collector engaged in unfair debt collection practices, you may have a legal claim and could be owed compensation for violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA).

Get a Free Case Evaluation Now

DISCLAIMER: Debt collection itself is not illegal. However, debt collection firms collecting on consumer debts must adhere to the FDCPA. Even though debt attorneys are investigating these companies, their debt collection practices may be legal.