Merrick Bank class action alleges unlawful debt collection despite attorney representation

Merrick Bank class action overview:

• Who: Plaintiff Harvey Pitts filed a class action lawsuit against Merrick Bank and Halsted Financial Services LLC.
• Why: Pitts claims the companies engaged in unlawful debt collection by contacting him directly despite knowing he was represented by an attorney.
• Where: The Merrick Bank class action lawsuit was filed in Florida federal court.
• How to get help: If you’ve experienced debt collection calls and harassment, you may be eligible to join a debt collection lawsuit investigation.

A new class action lawsuit alleges Merrick Bank and its debt collection partner, Halsted Financial Services, violated federal and state law by contacting a consumer directly after he had obtained legal representation.

Plaintiff Harvey Pitts filed the complaint on May 27, alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) and Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act (FCCPA) — both of which bar debt collectors from contacting a represented consumer directly.

In May 2025, Pitts notified Bank of Missouri, the original creditor on an unsecured line of credit, that he was represented by an attorney and that all future communications should go to his counsel.

Pitts claims Bank of Missouri disclosed to Merrick Bank during the sale that he had legal representation, disputed the debt and had directed all contact to his attorney.

The Merrick Bank class action lawsuit further alleges the sale price itself was influenced by Pitts’ represented status, therefore Merrick Bank had full knowledge from the moment it acquired the debt, yet it still hired Halsted Financial to collect directly from him.

Pitts wants to represent a class of consumers contacted directly by either company in connection with a consumer debt after the companies knew they were represented by an attorney.

Merrick Bank, Halsted Financial allegedly failed to disclose debt was disputed

The Merrick Bank class action lawsuit claims the unlawful debt collection did not stop at the unauthorized contact, alleging that Halsted Financial sent Pitts a collection letter dated Dec. 27, 2025, in an attempt to collect the debt.

Pitts also argues that the collection letter failed to disclose that the debt was disputed, a separate violation of both the FDCPA and the FCCPA.

Under the FDCPA, debt collectors are barred from communicating credit information they know to be false, including “the failure to communicate that a disputed debt is disputed,” the class action lawsuit says.

Pitts alleges Merrick Bank informed Halsted Financial that he disputed the debt before placing the account for collection, but Halsted Financial later sent a collection letter that failed to disclose the debt was disputed.

The plaintiff is demanding a jury trial and requesting declaratory and injunctive relief, statutory and actual damages, and an award of costs and attorneys’ fees.

Meanwhile, Synchrony Bank recently faced a class action lawsuit alleging it used artificial or prerecorded voice messages to unlawfully collect an alleged debt.

What do you think of the claims made against Merrick Bank and Halsted Financial? Let us know in the comments.

The plaintiff is represented by Talal Rashid of Patti Zabaleta Law Group.

The Merrick Bank class action lawsuit is Pitts v. Merrick Bank, et al., Case No. 5:26-cv-00138, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• Washington Post class action alleges customer data used to set subscription prices
• Audi hit with class action over alleged subframe defect in Q5, SQ5 vehicles
• SheaMoisture class action alleges products falsely labeled as 100% virgin coconut oil
• Waymo recalls robotaxis after vehicles enter freeway construction zones