TCPA is Expensive Compared to Other Consumer Statutes

Eric J. Troutman

Email

949-350-3663

Bio and Articles

Settlement Reveals How Expensive the TCPA is Compared to Other Consumer Statutes

by: Eric J. Troutman of Troutman Amin, LLP - TCPAWorld

Wednesday, December 4, 2019

Print Mail Download

i

If you’re reading TCPAWorld.com you know the TCPA is no ordinary statute. And rather obviously TCPA class litigation matters are among the biggest and most complex cases out there.

While you can take a survey of TCPA class settlements and compare them to other sorts of cases and see for yourself the vast disparity in value, the recent settlement in Sheean v. Convergent Outsourcing, Inc., Case No: 2:18-cv-11532-GCS-RSW, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 197446 provides a quick primer.

In Sheehan the named Plaintiff claimed that he received debt collection calls Defendant via an ATDS or prerecorded voice, that were intended for other people. He alleged that he instructed Convergent to stop calling him, however, Convergent allegedly continued to place calls to his number.

While revocation cases of these sort are rarely (if ever certifiable) the Defendant elected to resolve the case on a classwide basis.

The judge gave final approval to two proposed classes:

TCPA Class: All persons (1) to whom Convergent placed, or caused to be placed, a call, (2) by using an ATDS or an artificial or prerecorded voice, (3) from November 2016 through February 2019, and (4) either (i) directed to a cellphone number that was not assigned to the intended call recipient, or (ii) directed to a cellphone number that Convergent was instructed to stop calling, or was informed it was a wrong number.

FDCPA Class: All persons (1) to whom Convergent placed, or caused to be placed, a call, (2) from May 2017 through February 2019, (3) in connection with consumer debt collection, (4) after Convergent was instructed to stop placing calls to his or her number or informed that the number was a wrong number.

But now for the real story–the vast difference in the value of the TCPA and the FDCPA components of the case.

$40,000 settlement fund was approved for the FDCPA portion vs $3,710,000 fund for the TCPA portion.

Essentially, for relatively the same allegations and time period, the TCPA settlement was nearly 100 times more than the FDCPA settlement. Highlighting this pattern, the named Plaintiff Sheehan, was awarded a mere $50 from the FDCPA fund, and $4,450 from the TCPA settlement fund. Plaintiffs’ counsel, Greenwald Davidson Radbil PLLC, and Andrew Campbell were approved to recover $1,250,000 in attorney’s fees.

So it goes.