Citibank Robocalls Lawsuit Claims Violation of Anti-Telemarketing Law

A Florida woman has filed a lawsuit against Citibank, claiming that the company illegally called her phone multiple times in violation of federal law.

In her Citibank robocalls lawsuit, plaintiff Amanda S. claims that she received multiple calls to both her home phone and cell phone from Citibank to collect on an alleged debt.

Amanda also claims that Citibank robocalls came into her place of employment in the attempt to collect on her alleged debt. These calls began in 2016, she claims in her Citibank robocalls lawsuit.

In March 2017, Amanda hired an attorney to help her prevent Citibank from continuing to call her. When she received one of the Citibank robocalls again, she told them to contact her attorney and asked them to stop calling her.

According to Amanda’s Citibank robocalls lawsuit, despite the fact that she gave a cease and desist request to Citibank, they continued to make unwanted calls to her cell phone all the way until May 2017.

She claims that the calls they made to her phones were robocalls. A robocall is a call made by an automated dialing system. These types of calls are regulated by federal law. The way she knew that the calls were robocalls was that she “noticed pauses before a live representative appeared on the line.”

Additionally, she alleges the Citibank robocalls resulted in pre-recorded messages left on Amanda’s cell and home phone numbers; when she did answer, pre-recorded messages played. This, Amanda claims, is a violation of the both the FCCPA and the TCPA.

Consumer Protection Laws

The FCCPA is the Florida Consumer Collection Protection Act, and the TCPA is the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. The TCPA, a federal law instituted in 1991, regulates how customers can be contacted by businesses via telephone, SMS text and fax.

Generally, the TCPA prohibits callers from a number of actions, including calling after 9pm or before 8am, calling if a phone number is on the national do not call registry, and restricts calling using pre-recorded messages, among other protections.

If a business violates this in any way, it can be subject to stiff penalties. Each TCPA violation may reap up to $500 for the consumer, and if the violation was deemed willful, it can cost the company up to $1,500 per violation.

Amanda claims in her Citibank robocalls lawsuit that the “Defendant willfully, knowingly, and intentionally made multiple calls to Plaintiff’s cell phone utilizing an automatic telephone dialing system after Plaintiff told Defendant that Defendant did not have permission to call Plaintiff’s cell phone.”

Amanda also claims that Citibank violated the Florida Consumer Collection Protection Act by contacting her after she gave them the information for her attorney.

Also, Citibank allegedly violated the FCCPA because Florida law states that no business entity should “Willfully communicate with the debtor or any member of her or his family with such frequency as can reasonably be expected to harass the debtor or her or his family, or willfully engage in other conduct which can reasonably be expected to abuse or harass the debtor or any member of her or his family.”

This Citibank Robocalls Lawsuit is Case No. 8:18-cv-00609-EAK-JSS in United States 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