In the world of telemarketing, different dialing methods carry different amounts of risk relating to potential Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) violations. Text platforms are one of the riskiest of all, in large part because the telemarketers who use them are often not aware of the risks.
An energy supplier that is a defendant in a class action for alleged Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) has filed a counterclaim against a third-party leads generator, alleging that the TCPA violations came about because they expressly disregarded compliance instructions and then falsified documentation to cover up their misdeeds.
After a delay due to the COVID-19 crisis, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Wednesday in a case—William P. Barr, et al. v. American Association of Political Consultants, et al.—that could very well result in the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) being ruled unconstitutional. We offer you a summary of these oral arguments based on a reading of several expert analyses.
Who stands to bear the costs of a Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) lawsuit? If you have to ask, the answer is probably, “You do.” Any business that conducts a significant amount of telephone solicitations is at risk of running afoul of the TCPA. Even non-marketing calls can trigger TCPA liability.
According to Cornell Law School’s Legal Information Institute, a “Safe Harbor” is “a provision granting protection from liability or penalty if certain conditions are met. A safe harbor provision may be included in statutes or regulations to give peace of mind to good-faith actors who might otherwise violate the law on technicalities beyond their reasonable control.”
Both telemarketing and debt collection are, quite literally, risky businesses. Both fields are highly regulated, governed by complex legislation, and subject to potentially expensive penalties and litigation.
In an unusual move relative to its customary stance on such issues, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) has requested that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) ease restrictions on the use of automated phone calls by banks and financial institutions in order to communicate with consumers about the various financial relief programs and services available to the public in the
The Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) is an outdated statute, well overdue for an update (and may well get one, thanks to the case, William P. Barr et al. v. American Association of Political Consultants et al., about to be argued before the Supreme Court). Its flaws and inconsistencies have created a cottage industry of lawsuit-mill litigators.
Throughout the various ups and downs of Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) litigation, federal and state regulatory actions, and precedent-setting court decisions, one of the few consistent truths is that plaintiff attorneys make money hand over fist.