Flagship TCPA Settlement Isn’t Fair, Judge Says

A federal judge recently denied final approval of a Flagship TCPA class action settlement, finding the deal unfair to Class Members.

U.S. District Court Judge Michael M. Baylson determined that a $4 million proposed settlement is not enough to resolve the Flagship TCPA class action lawsuit.

The proposed settlement was set to resolve allegations that Flagship Credit Acceptance LLC violated federal law by using an autodialer to call consumers. The plaintiffs alleged that these calls violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA).

Flagship did not admit to violating the TCPA but agreed to settle the claims against them with a $4 million class action settlement. The settlement was proposed to benefit all consumers who received a call from Flagship through TCN, LiveVox or Aspect dialing system and/or with an artificial or prerecorded voice between May 5, 2013 and Sept. 18, 2018.

Under the settlement, Class Members would have been able to collect $35.30 based on the number of claims filed. The deadline for filing a settlement claim was Feb. 25, 2019. The settlement would have covered these payments along with expenses, $10,000 incentive award and attorneys’ fees comprising 33 percent of the fund.

Although the settlement was granted preliminary approval, Judge Baylson recently denied final approval for the settlement after finding several deficiencies.

The first deficiency was lack of information available regarding the strengths and weaknesses of the Flagship class action. This information is reportedly intended to help Class attorneys’ advise the Class Members regarding the viability of their case and the benefits of settling.

According to the judge, a settlement was reached too early in the Flagship class action lawsuit for the necessary information to be available.

The second deficiency in the settlement was the argument that Flagship was financially unable to pay more than $4 million into the settlement. Despite the emphasis on this argument, there was reportedly “no underlying financial information provided” to the proposed Class Members. Additionally, Judge Baylson notes that “after in camera review of the financials” the argument was found to be “inaccurate.”

The final deficiency stems from the fairness of the Flagship class action lawsuit. The judge reportedly remains skeptical that a $4 million settlement counts as fair, given that Class Members would only receive payments of $35.30.

“The combination of these concerns, plus the amount of attorney’s fees requested by Class Counsel, leads the Court to deny final approval of the settlement,” Baylson wrote in his denial motion.

“However, the Court does not foreclose the possibility of approving an amended settlement agreement that is revised to address the concerns outlined in this Memorandum.”

The plaintiffs and defendants will have to make reasonable changes in order to see the deal move forward with court approval.

What are your thoughts on the Flagship class action settlement? Let us know in the comments section below.

Plaintiffs and settlement members are represented by attorneys from Lemberg Law LLC.

The Flagship TCPA Class Action Lawsuit is Ward v. Flagship Credit Acceptance LLC, Case No. 17-cv-02069, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District 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.

Read More Lawsuit & Settlement News:

Caviar Class Action Alleges Delivery App Withholds Funds

Honest Tea Class Action Says ‘Just a Tad Sweet’ Marketing Is Deceptive

What Diabetes Medication Causes Flesh Eating Bacteria Infections?

Does Dilantin Cause Brain Damage?