Capital One Class Action Says Autodialed Phone Calls Violate Federal Law

A Florida man says Capital One has been pestering him with autodialed mobile phone calls even after he told the company to stop calling.

Plaintiff Darrell Pickett is accusing defendant Capital One NA of placing autodialed, non-emergency phone calls to his mobile phone number without first getting his prior express consent to be contacted that way. He alleges Capital One has been directing calls like these to an entire Class of plaintiffs like himself.

Pickett says the calls started a few months after he got a new mobile phone number. He reports receiving multiple calls from Capital One between April and July 2016. Based on the frequency and other characteristics of the calls, he believes Capital One placed them using automated dialing equipment.

More than once, Pickett says, he told Capital One to stop calling. He answered the company’s calls on a few occasions just to tell the Capital One representative that they were calling the wrong number and that he wanted them to stop calling his mobile phone.

Pickett disclaims any prior relationship between himself and Capital One. He says he is not now and has not previously been a Capital One customer. He says he never gave Capital One his mobile phone number, and he certainly did not consent to receiving automatically-dialed phone calls.

He believes Capital One was trying to reach a person to whom that phone number had previously been assigned, after receiving a voicemail from Capital One asking for someone Pickett does not know.

Pickett argues this string of unconsented autodialed calls violates the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act, or TCPA. The TCPA restricts the use of automated telephone dialing equipment and prerecorded or artificial voice messages to place calls to a person who has not expressly consented to that sort of contact.

When it was originally enacted in 1991, the TCPA applied to phone calls made to land lines. After subsequent amendments by Congress and interpretive statements by the Federal Communications Commission, the act’s restrictions now apply to calls and SMS text messages directed at mobile phone lines.

The TCPA provides for statutory damages of $500 per non-compliant phone call. Damages can be tripled to $1,500 for each call that the plaintiff can show was made in knowing or willful violation of the law.

Pickett proposes to represent a plaintiff Class that would include all persons in the U.S. whose mobile phones Capital One called regarding the company’s automobile financing business within the four years preceding this action, using an autodialer or prerecorded voice and without having gotten the called party’s prior express consent.

He is asking the court for an order enjoining Capital One from continuing to place autodialed phone calls on their mobile phones without prior express consent. He also seeks an award of damages, attorneys’ fees, costs and expenses.

Pickett is represented by Jesse S. Johnson, Michael L. Greenwald, James L. Davidson and Aaron D. Radbil of of Greenwald Davidson Radbil PLLC.

The Capital One TCPA Class Action Lawsuit is Darrell Pickett v. Capital One NA, Case No. 6:17-cv-00260, in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida.

UPDATE: The Capital One TCPA class action lawsuit was dismissed on May 12, 2017.  Top Class Actions will let our viewers know if any new cases are filed.

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