Robocalls from Chase Prompt New TCPA Lawsuit

A Colorado plaintiff alleges robocalls from Chase kept coming even after she asked the bank to stop calling.

Plaintiff Crystina A. is filing this TCPA lawsuit, alleging she received robocalls from Chase beginning on Feb. 20, 2017. When Crystina answered these calls, she says, she would hear silence or a beeping tone before a live representative would pick up and start speaking.

The alleged robocalls from Chase were repeatedly made to despite Crystina’s explicit requests to stop calling. Based on the number of calls received and the artificial voice that answered, Crystina alleges these calls were placed using an automated telephone dialing system.

Crystina says sometime she would get an artificial voice message when she answered the call, instead of a live representative. In total, Crystina says she received at least 157 alleged robocalls from Chase to her cellphone and had asked for the calls to stop on at least one occasion.

This occasion occurred on Feb. 22, 2017, when Crystina says she revoked any type of consent given to contact her. She reportedly spoke to a Chase customer service representative and told the person she no longer wished to be contacted by stating “please stop calling my cell phone on all accounts.”

Even though Crystina specifically asked for the calls to stop, she allegedly continued to receive robocalls from Chase. Crystaina opted to file legal action against the bank, claiming these calls were made to harass her.

Overview of TCPA Policy

These calls were allegedly made with automated dialing system and were answered with an artificial or prerecorded voice, both of which can be violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.

The TCPA was passed in the early 1990s to help protect consumers against aggressive telemarketing tactics. Under the TCPA, companies are restricted from using an automated dialing system to generate and place phone calls and are prohibited from using an artificial voice recording to answer if picked up by a consumer, unless the consumer has consented to receiving that sort of contact.

A live representative from the company must be able to identity themselves and the company they work for in order to be TCPA compliant. In addition to not using automated dialing systems software, companies must also add consumers to their do-not-call registry if they do not wish to be contacted and respect that for five years.

In addition to the alleged robocalls, Chase allegedly ignored Crystina’s request to stop contacting her and continued to place calls. By doing this, Crystina says Chase also violated the TCPA by continuing to contact her despite her being added to the bank’s do-not-call registry.

Furthermore, the TCPA also prevents companies from becoming too invasive with consumers’ personal lives by also preventing them from calling outside of reasonable daytime hours.

The TCPA has been amended to unwanted calls and spam text messages sent to consumers’ mobile phones.

Companies that are found to be in violation of the TCPA could face between $500 and $1,500 in statutory damages per unwanted phonecall, depending if they are found to be in willful violation.

Crystina alleges Chase willfully violated the TCPA, as the calls interfered with her personal life and had caused her emotional distress. She is filing this TCPA lawsuit, seeking damages for each unwanted phonecall.

This TCPA Lawsuit is Case No. 1:17-cv-02267-KMT, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado.

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