February 5, 2023

Volume XIII, Number 36

Error message

  • Warning: Undefined variable $settings in include_once() (line 135 of /var/www/html/docroot/sites/default/settings.php).
  • Warning: Trying to access array offset on value of type null in include_once() (line 135 of /var/www/html/docroot/sites/default/settings.php).
Advertisement

February 03, 2023

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

February 02, 2023

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis
Advertisement

THROWN OUT: Another Court Confirms No TCPA Private Right of Action to Enforce Prerecorded Call Content Claims

So it is really unbelievable that the TCPA SUMMIT is NEXT WEEK already.

One of the amazing things about the Summit and its two day format is that I can dive into topics I NEVER have time to discuss in 45 minute or 1 hour sessions that we have at other shows.

For instance, last year I had the opportunity to discuss the rising rash of content-based TCPA claims and where there is a private right of action and where there isn’t. I even made this clever stork slide to guide the discussion:

Setting the stage, the TCPA’s implementing regulations (47 CFR 64.1200) contain two provisions related to the required content of calls– those found at 64.1200(b) and 64.1200(d)(4).

The 64.1200(b) provisions generally require certain disclosures related to the identity of the caller at the outset of a prerecorded call along with a required opt out mechanism for live prerecorded calls and for voicemails.

The 64.1200(d)(4) provisions are more narrow but require a telemarketer to provide a full disclosure of their identity during the course of a call.

Now the CFR is not automatically enforceable. Plaintiffs an only bring suit for violations of these provisions where the TCPA authorizes. And whether authority exists turns on whether the FCC implemented these provisions under either 227(c)–containing a private right of action–or 227(d)–which does not.

Unhelpfully both provisions give the FCC the right to implement regulations. And also unhelpfully the FCC has implemented regs under both provisions WITHOUT SPECIFYING which of the two statutory provisions the regs are implemented pursuant to.

This has–somewhat unbelievably–resulted in litigants an the courts having to fight over what the FCC was thinking when it implemented these provisions.

As with other fights in TCPAWorld, this one remains a bit of a mess. However the courts are MOSTLY aligned that 64.1200(b) was implemented under 227(d). And that, in turn, means there is NO private right action (i.e. you cannot be sued in a TCPA class action for violating those provisions.)

The latest court to so hold is Escano v. RCI, LLC,  2022 WL 17251273 (D. N.M. 11/28/2022):

The regulatory provisions in 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200(b) implement a subsection of the TCPA, which mandates that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) “prescribe technical and procedural standards for systems that are used to transmit any artificial or prerecorded voice message via telephone.” 47 U.S.C. § 227(d)(3). But “[t]his [TCPA] subsection [§ 227(d)] does not create an associated private right of action.” Barrett v. Vivint, Inc., No. 2:19-cv-00568-DBB-CMR, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89055, at *13 (D. Utah May 20, 2020) (citing § 227(d)). Therefore, “[the] [t]echnical and procedural standards specific to automated calls [that] are included in § 227(d) and [its] accompanying regulation 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200(b) … do not provide a private right of action or a statutory-damages provision.” Charvat v. NMP, LLC, 656 F.3d 440, 449 (6th Cir. 2011).7

Make sense?

I should caution that many courts go the other way on these issues–especially as to content claims brought under 64.1200(d)(4). There is a long and winding back story as to why that is– if I have time I’ll discuss for summit goers next week!

Happy Tuesday TCPAWorld. 

© 2023 Troutman FirmNational Law Review, Volume XII, Number 333
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

About this Author

Eric Troutman TCPA Lawyer Troutman Law Firm Orange County, CA
Founder

Eric J Troutman is known as one of the country’s prominent class action defense lawyers and is nationally recognized in Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) litigation and compliance. He has served as lead defense counsel in more than 70 national TCPA class actions and has litigated nearly a thousand individual TCPA cases in his role as national strategic litigation counsel for major banks and finance companies. Eric also helps industry participants build TCPA-compliant processes, policies, and systems.

Eric's perspective allows him to...

949-350-3663
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement