Harassing Portfolio Recovery Phone Calls Prompt TCPA Lawsuit

A consumer recently filed a lawsuit alleging that he received harassing Portfolio Recovery phone calls in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.

Plaintiff Robert B. filed the lawsuit against Portfolio Recovery Associates LLC over claims that he received repeated, harassing Portfolio Recovery phone calls.

Robert says the 60 Portfolio Recovery phone calls he received were in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA).

In 2015, Robert alleges he began getting Portfolio Recovery phone calls regarding an owed debt. These calls were reportedly made using an auto-dialing system.

He says he never consented to being contacted by the company and repeatedly told Portfolio Recovery to stop calling him, revoking any consent Portfolio Recovery may have thought it had.

Since Robert began receiving Portfolio Recovery calls in 2015, the company has made at least 60 calls to his personal cell phone.

“Defendant intentionally harassed and abused Plaintiff on numerous occasions by calling several times during one day, and on back to back days, with such frequency as can reasonably be expected to harass,” Robert argues in his TCPA lawsuit.

TCPA and FDCPA Lawsuit

Robert claims that the Portfolio Recovery phone calls are a direct violation of TCPA and FDCPA. By repeatedly calling him using an automatic dialing system and calling him after he told them not to, Portfolio Recovery allegedly harassed Robert in an attempt to pressure him to pay his debt.

The TCPA lawsuit also alleges that Robert sustained damages from this behavior including invasion of privacy, depleted battery life, and the charges for minutes used by Portfolio Recovery phone calls.

In his TCPA lawsuit, Robert also claims that his experience was not unique, citing numerous lawsuits against the company.

He alleges that various consumers have received Portfolio Recovery phone calls without consenting to them. Company policy reportedly allow the repeated, harassing placement of Portfolio Recovery phone calls with no means of relief for consumers such as Robert, even after consumers revoke consent.

“Defendant’s corporate policies and procedures are structured as to continue to call individuals like the Plaintiff, despite these individuals revoking any consent the Defendant may have mistakenly believed it had,” Robert claims.

TCPA was passed by Congress to protect consumers from the repeated invasion of privacy and nuisance caused by robocalls, or calls made with an automatic dialing system. Robocalls have become increasingly common, according to the TCPA lawsuit. Because they are easy and inexpensive to place, many companies utilize robocalls to harass consumers.

“The number of people complaining about harassing robocalls is increasing at an alarming rate,” the TCPA lawsuit states. “In 2015, 2,125,968 complained to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Federal Communications Commission (FCC), in 2016 this number was 3,401,614 2016 and in 2017 it was 4,501,967.”

TCPA provides regulations which prevent harassing phone calls and also allows consumers to seek damages for any violations. Robert seeks $500 for each violation under TCPA in addition to statutory damages, punitive damages, actual damages, court costs, and attorneys’ fees.

The TCPA Lawsuit is Case No. 8:18-cv-02060-SDM-JSS, 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