Bureau ofConsumer Protection
|[pic] |
|Bureau of |
|Consumer Protection |
|UNITED STATES OF AMERICA |
|FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION |
|WASHINGTON, D.C. 20580 |
| |
| |
| |
|May 19, 1989 |
| |
| |
|Ms. Suellen A. Keever |
|Attorney |
|Sentara Health System |
|Finance Division |
|P.O. Box 2200 |
|Norfolk, Virginia 23501 |
|Dear Ms. Keever: |
|This is in response to your inquiry of April 26, 1989 inquiring whether your activities as in house counsel for Sentara Health |
|System fall within the purview of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). You further ask whether the institution of |
|legal action by Sentara against consumers in judicial districts other than where the consumer resides or where the consumer |
|signed the contract may violate Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act. |
|Section 8036 (A) of the FDCPA excludes from the definition of collector "any officer or employee of a creditor while, in the name|
|of the creditor, collecting debts for such creditor." This exemption also includes a creditor's salaried attorney who collects |
|debts on behalf of, and in the name of the creditor. Based upon the facts outlined in your letter, none of your collection |
|activities on behalf of Sentara would be subject to the FDCPA, including the venue requirements of Section 811. |
|Please note however that the "fair venue standard" adopted by Congress in Section 811 of the FDCPA was developed by the |
|Commission as a result of several enforcement actions brought prior to the FDCPA, and recently reaffirmed in a Commission action |
|against J.C. Penney Co. The actions were brought pursuant to the Commission's jurisdiction over unfair acts or practices in or |
|affecting commerce, as set out in Section 5 (a) (i) of the Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45 (a) (i). Although Sentara|
|may not be subject to the venue requirements of Section 811 of the FDCPA, the fair venue standard developed under Section 5 of |
|the Federal Trade Commission Act would, of course, continue to apply to Sentara's collection practices, including those that you |
|employ in Sentara's name. |
|I am enclosing recent staff interpretations addressed to attorneys which relate to the two issues raised in your letter;(1) a |
|copy of the Commission's Order in the J.C. Penney matter (109 FTC 54), and a copy of the FDCPA staff commentary which sets out |
|the staff's views on the various provisions of the FDCPA, including the exemptions granted to creditors and their employees.(2) |
|This constitutes an unofficial staff interpretation and is not binding on the Commission. I hope the information will be helpful.|
|Sincerely, |
|Roger J. Fitzpatrick |
|Attorney |
|Division of Credit Practices |
|1. See letters to Mr. Martin Schwam, dated October 20, 1986, and to Ronald D. Garrison, Esq. dated April 6, 1988. |
|2. Official Staff Commentary on the FDCPA, 53 Fed. Reg. 5012, par. 4 (December 13, 1988). |
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related download
- bureau of consumer credit protection
- cfpb closing disclosure addendum to contract
- consumer financial protection bureau
- 030 bureau of consumer credit protection chapter 550
- home department of general services
- bureau ofconsumer protection
- bureau of consumer credit protection maine
- a summary of your rights under the fair credit reporting act
Related searches
- consumer protection agency complaint
- chewable flea protection for cats
- federal pension garnishment protection act
- best flea and tick protection for puppies
- california consumer protection agency
- department of environmental protection fl
- florida department of environmental protection permits
- consumer protection agency complaint form
- best tick protection for dogs
- frontline flea protection for cats
- suze orman protection portfolio code
- colorado public deposit protection act