On September 4, a federal judge in the state of Washington granted partial summary judgment for the plaintiff in an FDCPA case, finding the debt collector liable under the FDCPA, the Washington Collection Agency Act (WCAA), and Washington’s Consumer Protection Act (CPA). The plaintiff alleged the defendant attempted to collect and report on a debt the defendant did not owe — negatively affecting the plaintiff’s credit.

The court found that the defendant’s actions met the FDCPA’s “strict liability” standard, noting that reporting a debt not owed is “not a trivial misstatement” and can “directly affect creditworthiness.” The court also determined that collecting an amount not “expressly authorized by the agreement creating the debt or permitted by law” violates Section 1692f(1) of the FDCPA.

In response to the defendant’s “bona fide error” defense, the court explained that a debt collector must show it maintained “procedures reasonably adapted to avoid the violation.” The court found the defendant failed to identify any internal procedure to that effect, relying instead on the creditor’s contractual warranty, which the court deemed insufficient. As a result, the court determined the defendant did not establish the bona fide error defense was applicable in this matter.

The court further found that the defendant’s attempt to collect unauthorized fees violated the WCAA, which constituted a “per se violation of the CPA,” and that the plaintiff established “injury and causation” by showing time and expenses incurred in responding to the defendant’s actions. The court granted summary judgment for the plaintiff on liability, directed the plaintiff to submit proof of damages, vacated the trial date, and ordered the parties to meet and confer regarding settlement.