In Tavernaro v. Pioneer Credit Recovery, Inc., No. 2:20-CV-02141-KHV-ADM, 2022WL3153234 (10th Cir. Aug. 8, 2022), the Tenth Circuit recently held that violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) are to be evaluated through the perspective of a reasonable consumer rather than the “least sophisticated consumer” standard adopted by other circuits. The court first established that a debt collector’s communications violate the FDCPA when the false or misleading communications are material. The court then articulated that materiality is measured by whether “a reasonable consumer would have his ability to respond [to the communication] frustrated.”
The issue before the court was whether a student loan debt collector violated the FDCPA by sending a wage garnishment order and accompanying letter to the plaintiff’s employer. The plaintiff alleged the letter was deceptive because it used the creditor’s name, letterhead, and signature rather than those of the debt collector that the creditor contracted with to assist in collections. Before evaluating the merits of the plaintiff’s claims, the court announced the standard that the Tenth Circuit would use for FDCPA claims.
First, the Tenth Circuit held that a consumer must demonstrate materiality. In other words, only materially false or deceptive communications are actionable under the FDCPA. Although the FDCPA does not use the word “material,” the court still construed the FDCPA to require materiality...
( May 12, 2026 / JNS ) The reported purchase by an Israeli entrepreneur of roughly 70% of the homes in the deserted village of Trozena, Cyprus, has triggered a wave of false rumors and accusations...