TCPA Lawsuit Says Chase Bank Keeps Calling Regarding Alleged Debt

A woman has filed a lawsuit alleging Chase Bank keeps calling her even though she did not consent to the frequent calls.

Plaintiff Flora T. says Chase Bank started calling her multiple times because of an alleged debt. She also alleges the bank also contacted her son and her significant other regarding the alleged debt.

In addition, Chase Bank allegedly had third parties call their cell phones at least a dozen times between July and September 2018.

Chase Bank and the third party entity allegedly used an automated telephone dialing system to place the collection calls repeatedly in pursuit of the debt allegedly owed by Flora.

The use of an automatic telephone dialing system, artificial voice or pre-recorded voice without the called party’s consent is likely a violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). Congress enacted the TCPA in 1991 to keep consumers from receiving unwanted telemarketing phone calls and faxes. The TCPA was designed to specifically target the prevention of automated telephone dialing systems from continually making unnecessary and unwanted phone calls.

When the act was amended to cover cell phones, most cell phone plans charged the customer per phone call or per minute used. The recipient of unwanted phone calls would end up paying to receive the harassing calls.

In 2012, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) updated the TCPA, requiring telemarketers to receive written consent from a consumer before using an automated telephone dialing system, which is also known as robocalling.

Telemarketers or automated dialers also must give the call’s recipient an interactive opt-out choice so the consumer can direct the business to stop making the calls.

The TCPA acknowledges that unwanted phone calls use battery energy, memory, data, software and hardware that should not have been expended. Some cell phones charge for all incoming calls, an expense that should not be a burden on the consumer who is receiving unsolicited calls.

Flora’s lawsuit also alleges that Chase Bank is committing violations of the Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, a California civil code provision that protects consumers from abusive and unfair debt collection practices.

According to Flora’s lawsuit, she never gave Chase Bank permission to contact a third party in connection with the collection of the alleged debt.

Flora alleges that because Chase Bank keeps calling, the bank’s actions are “malicious, intentional, willful, [and] reckless.” She alleges she suffered and continues to suffer humiliation, embarrassment, mental anguish, and emotional distress because Chase Bank keeps calling.

According to TCPA regulations, every negligent violation can result in a $500 award in statutory damages to the plaintiff. If the TCPA violations were willful and done knowing they were in violation of the TCPA, each violation can result in $1,500 in statutory damages.

The Chase Bank Keeps Calling Lawsuit is Case No. 3:18-cv-02897-JLS-NLS in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of San Diego, Limited Jurisdiction.

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