Carson Smithfield Overshadowed Consumer’s Rights in Collection Letter, Lawsuit Claims

New to ClassAction.org? Read our Newswire Disclaimer

A New York consumer claims in a proposed class action that Carson Smithfield, LLC sent an unlawful second collection letter within his 30-day validation period in which he had the right to dispute the debt.

The suit takes issue with a second letter supposedly sent less than a week after the plaintiff received an initial collection notice from the defendant. The plaintiff claims that despite receiving the initial communication from Carson Smithfield on August 18, 2017, he received a second notice demanding payment just six days later. In addition to being sent within the consumer’s validation period, the second letter failed to disclose the plaintiff’s rights regarding a dispute of the debt, nor did it provide any further explanation after stating the plaintiff’s account was in default, the lawsuit charges.

“Even if a debt collector conveys the required information accurately,” the case reads, “the debt collector nonetheless violates the [Fair Debt Collection Practices Ac] if that information is overshadowed by other collection activities during the 30-day validation period following the communication.”