Plaintiff Alleges Illegal Comenity Capital Bank Robocalls

A Comenity Capital Bank robocalls lawsuit says that consumers were harmed when Comenity Bank allegedly used unconsented robocalls in its debt collection efforts.

Plaintiff Melissa M. says that the Comenity Bank robocalls regularly interrupted her life and were carried out in violation of existing consumer protection laws.

The plaintiff, a Pennsylvania resident, says that she experienced a nuisance and invasion of privacy due to the use of robocalls by the debt collection company. The Comenity Capital Bank robocalls lawsuit says that the plaintiff’s rights and interests were interfered with on a regular basis and that these calls were made using an automatic telephone dialing system or a prerecorded voice or artificial voice.

The Comenity Capital Bank robocalls lawsuit says that the calls were not made for emergency purposes and were not made with the express consent of the plaintiff. The lawsuit details all of the different provisions in the TCPA that would prohibit the bank from making robocalls.

The interruption from robocalls throughout the day is aggravating for consumers who don’t know how to make the calls stop. Not being able to speak to a person means the company can call all throughout the day.

Getting multiple phone calls even after asking the company to stop can cause issues for the person getting the calls. The Telephone Consumer Protection Act is there to outline what companies can and cannot do while also empowering consumers with the option for consumers to file a legal claim if someone violates the law.

If a person repeatedly is contacted in violation of the TCPA, they may be in a position to file a civil TCPA lawsuit.

According to federal laws, plaintiffs may be entitled to an award of $500 in statutory damages for each willful or knowing violation that was made by calling a cellular telephone number as a robocall or using an automated dialing system. The Comenity Capital Bank robocalls lawsuit also says that the plaintiff is entitled to these increased damages because the calls were made knowingly or willfully.

The plaintiff has requested judgement in the Comenity Capital Bank robocalls lawsuit for statutory damages up to $1,500 per call as well as other relief from the court. The use of an automated telephone dialing system is not only inconvenient but can be illegal, as are other debt collection methods that violate a consumer’s rights.

The Telephone Consumer Protection Act outlines what companies can and cannot do when reaching out to consumers and when a consumer identifies a violation of this law, can form the basis of a lawsuit against the company or person placing the call.

If you or someone you know believes you might be able to participate in a class action lawsuit investigation because of allegations about Comenity Capital Bank robocalls or any other company involved in similar behavior, a consultation with a TCPA lawyer can apprise you of all your legal rights and options.

The Comenity Capital Bank Robocalls Lawsuit is case 3:18-CV-01438-RDM filed in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

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