TCPA Lawsuit: OneMain Financial Made 64 Unwanted Phone Calls

A man from Pennsylvania has initiated a TCPA lawsuit against OneMain Financial Inc. over allegations of unwanted cell phone calls.

Plaintiff Brian C. says that in August 2014 he began receiving unwanted cell phone calls from defendant OneMain Financial. When they called in January 2015, Brian asked them to stop calling him. After that call and through March 2015, OneMain called Brian at least 64 more times, as often as five times in a single day.

These calls were an attempt to collect a debt and were not made for emergency purposes, Brian says. He also believes these calls were made using an automatic telephone dialing system, which he says he never gave OneMain express consent to use.

The TCPA Lawsuit is Case No. 2:15-cv-05045 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

The Telephone Consumer Protection Act

Brian argues these phone calls constitute violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, or TCPA. Congress enacted the TCPA in response to growing displeasure with unwanted telephone calls and faxes.

The TCPA generally places restrictions on certain methods used by telemarketers to make phone calls, such as with an automatic telephone dialing system or with a prerecorded outgoing message.

Generally, TCPA restrictions hinge on the unsolicited nature of these types of calls, and businesses can get around those restrictions if they can get the called party’s consent to be called in that particular manner.

Today, cell phones get their own set of TCPA protections. With a limited number of exceptions, businesses may not make any calls to a person’s cell phone without that person’s prior express consent. TCPA restrictions have also been extended to cover text messages as well.

Consent Under the TCPA

A major issue under the TCPA is what constitutes proper revocation of consent. In Brian’s case, he believes he revoked any consent – if indeed he had given any consent in the first place – when he asked OneMain to stop calling him in January 2015. Would that action constitute proper revocation of consent?

In July 2015, the FCC released a Declaratory Ruling and Order intended to clarify many issues under the TCPA, including the issue of revocation of consent. According to that order, a called party can revoke their consent at any time and by “any reasonable means.”

This revocation can be oral, or it can be in writing. It could also be in person – so, for example, a department store customer getting calls about a credit balance could revoke consent orally in a conversation with a salesperson.

Businesses are also prevented from limiting the form in which revocation can happen. So even though the initial consent may need to be in writing, the business can’t demand the same for revocation.

TCPA Damages

The statutory damage provisions of the TCPA are what give it real muscle. Plaintiffs can claim $500 for each violative call made negligently. That amount can increase to as much as $1,500 for each violation the plaintiff can prove was made willfully.

TCPA class action lawsuits can address hundreds or thousands of violations at once, so the resulting dollar amounts are fairly impressive. Some settlement amounts in recent TCPA litigation have been between $30 and $40 million, and one settlement of allegations against Capital One Financial Corp. set the record for a TCPA settlement at $75.5 million.

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