Consumers Win Class Certification in GE Capital Robocall Lawsuit

A federal judge in California has certified a plaintiff Class in a nationwide robocall lawsuit, in which a group of consumers allege that GE Capital Retail Bank has made calls that violate the TCPA.

U.S. District Court Judge John A. Houston certified the Class. Those included in the Class are individuals who have received at least two of the calls at issue from GE Capital using an autodialer or prerecorded voice within a four-year period.

Class Members include those reflected in GE Capital’s records as “wrong number,” “third party,” or “wrong party” and yet still received unwanted calls. Any consumer who gave their express permission to GE Capital to make those calls is excluded from the Class.

In opposing class certification, GE Capital argued that the class definition in this new motion for certification was different from the previous definition. However, the judge noted that the new definition is a narrower and more specific version of the previous class definition.

As of now, it is unclear exactly how many consumers will be included in the Class. The judge has said that the plaintiffs expect a large number, noting that “it is clearly reasonable that at least 40 class members or more can be identified from defendant’s 340 million account holders.” Of course, a great deal more than 40 Class Members may be discovered.

Cellphone users involved in the robocall lawsuit allege that they have received a number of unwanted debt collection calls from GE Capital, despite the fact that they were not customers. These calls, according to the robocall lawsuit, violate TCPA rules.

The lead plaintiff involved in this robocall lawsuit reports that he received 25 separate calls from GE Capital. At least 23 of those calls were made after GE Capital was notified that his number was not connected to whichever customer the company was attempting to reach, the plaintiff claims.

Filing a Robocall Lawsuit Under the TCPA

The Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) was created in 1991. It was intended to protect consumers from unwanted solicitation. It includes restrictions on the placement of robocalls, which involve the use of an automated dialing machine and/or a pre-recorded message. SMS text messages also fall within this restriction.

Despite the fact that these kinds of calls, made without express permission, violate the TCPA, many companies choose to perform these kinds of calls anyway as part of a marketing strategy, hoping that consumers do not know enough about the TCPA to file a robocall lawsuit.

Simply knowing what TCPA violations are may help consumers get compensated for each violation.

Generally, actions by a company that are prohibited under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act may include:

• Calls placed to residences before 8 am or after 9 pm, local time
• Calling consumers who specifically asked the company not to call them (i.e. consumers on the company’s do-not-call list)
• Calling consumers on the National Do Not Call Registry
• Failing to identify the person or entity on whose behalf the call is being made
• Using an artificial voice or a recorded message
• Using an automated dialing machine to place the call
• Sending unsolicited advertising faxes

If you have received these kinds of calls or texts, and you believe them to be in violation of the TCPA, you may be eligible to receive compensation.

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