Ally Financial Robocall Lawsuit Alleges TCPA Violations

A proposed class action Ally Financial robocall lawsuit, filed in Florida federal court, will be allowed to continue despite the financial company’s attempt to seek summary judgment for the lawsuit.

The Ally Financial robocall lawsuit, filed in December 2015, alleges that the business called Plaintiff Donell Tillman a total of 22 times during a three month period. Tillman states that he began receiving calls from Ally for a consumer by another name.

Tillman stated that he was not the customer that Ally was looking for and asked the company to cease any phone calls to him. Despite Tillman’s requests, Ally continued to place calls to Tillman, and many times those calls were placed using prerecorded or artificial voice messages, also known as robocalls.

Tillman alleged in the Ally Financial robocall lawsuit that Ally violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, or TCPA, through its continued calls placed to him using a robocall system.

The TCPA was enacted to protect consumer privacy and to prevent consumers from receiving unwanted phone calls on their cell phone or landline phone, as well as junk texts or faxes. It exists as part of the establishment of the National Do Not Call Registry, where individuals can register their cell phone and landline numbers on a list to be free from receiving unwanted solicitation phone calls.

If businesses do not comply with the consumer’s wishes to not be contacted for solicitation purposes, the consumer may bring a lawsuit against the business. Additionally, there are other provisions of the TCPA, including prohibiting businesses from using autodialers or placing messages to consumers using an artificial voice or prerecorded message.

The Ally Financial Robocall lawsuit alleged, “Ally has caused consumers actual harm, not only because consumers were subjected to the aggravation that necessarily accompanies these calls, but also because consumers frequently have to pay their cell phone service providers for the receipt of such calls; such calls are also an intrusion upon seclusion, diminish cellular battery life, and waste time.”

Ally requested summary judgment, claiming that Tillman did not have statute under the TCPA because Tillman was not a ”called party” as determined by the statute. U.S. District Court Judge John E. Steele responded by saying, “Being a ‘called party’ is only relevant to the determination of whether the call violates the substantive provision of the TCPA; the term does not impact who may bring a lawsuit for TCPA violations.”

The judge also rejected Ally’s statement that Tillman lacked standing, stating, “Plaintiff’s allegations are sufficient to ‘fairly trace’ his injuries to Ally’s unwanted calls. Although defendant argues that plaintiff could not have been harmed by Ally’s calls that did not receive, or was unaware of, as the Court has discussed, the record shows that the calls were not in fact blocked, and that plaintiff was otherwise aware of nearly all of the 22 calls, undisputedly placed by Ally without consent. Thus, plaintiff has satisfied this element of standing.”

The Ally Financial Robocall Lawsuit is Tillman v. Ally Financial Inc., Case No 2:16-cv-313-FTM-99CM, in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida.

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