Hundreds of Unwanted Cell Phone Robocalls Spur TCPA Lawsuit

A woman from Georgia alleges she received unwanted cell phone robocalls from Capital One Bank seeking a supposed consumer debt in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA).

The TCPA lawsuit alleges that these unwanted cell phone robocalls were made with the intent to harass her, while also ignoring her privacy rights under the TCPA.

Plaintiff Phaedra G. alleges she has received over 200 of these calls to her mobile phone alone, despite her repeated requests for the calls to stop.

There have been at least two occasions that Phaedra says she asked for the calls to stop. Phaedra says that on March 31, 2018 and on April 02, 2018 she spoke to a Capital One representative and asked that the bank stop calling her cell phone.

Even though Phaedra allegedly demanded that the unwanted cell phone robocalls to stop, she says she continued to receive a barrage of unwanted communication. Based on the number of unwanted cell phone robocalls she received, she claims it is likely that Capital One used an automated dialing system to generate and contact her, alleges the lawsuit.

While it is not illegal to use automated dialing systems, companies can only use them to contact consumers if a disclosure is given and if they have express permission to contact the consumer that way. Capital One allegedly did not do either of these things, and continued to send unwanted cell phone robocalls.

Phaedra says she was eventually forced to file legal action, after the communications would not stop.

Overview of TCPA Policy

The TCPA was established by Congress in 1991 to help protect consumers against telemarketers, by placing strict regulations on these companies. Under the TCPA, companies cannot make unwanted robocalls or send unwanted texts or fax messages to consumers without prior consent.

The TCPA also requires companies to cease contacting the consumer if asked to. Once the consumer requests this, the company must place the consumer on their do-not-call registry and respect it for the next five years.

In addition, the TCPA prohibits companies from calling or texting at unreasonable hours to prevent further inconvenience to consumers. Companies found to be in violation of the TCPA could face between $500 to $1,500 per penalty, depending on whether or not willful violation can be proven.

Consumers considering filing a TCPA lawsuit should document all relevant communications, including important details such as:

• • Time and date of call, text, or fax
  • Summary of call, text, or fax
  • If an artificial voice responds
  • Whether or not prior consent was given before call, text, or fax was made
  • Whether or not call, text, or fax was made after revoking consent

If the company is found to be in violation of the TCPA, they could face major financial penalties for inconveniencing the consumer’s life. Not only are the constant communications annoying, they can also cost the consumer money by eating up cell phone minutes and taking up room on their voicemails.

Phaedra is seeking damages for all the unwanted cell phone robocalls, along with any other relevant compensation.

This TCPA Lawsuit is Case No. 4:18-cv-00169-CDL, in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia, Columbus Division.

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