Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) staff letter: Challed
May 16, 1994 · Section 807(3) [1692e(3)]; Section 807(10) [1692e(10)]
Topic: Impersonating an attorney
Staff opinion letters are informal views of FTC staff, not binding Commission rulings, and some were later superseded by statutory amendments (including the 2006 FDCPA amendments) or later guidance. Check current law before relying on any letter.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20580
Division of Credit Practices Bureau of Consumer Protection
May 16, 1994
David G. Challed
Utah Legal Services, Inc.
124 S. Fourth East
Fourth Floor
Salt Lake City, Utah 84111
Dear Mr. Challed:
This is in reply to your letter of April 20, 1994 concerning the propriety of the business name "Lawyers Collection Services" for a debt collection agency that has no lawyers on its staff. You ask whether use of the business name violates Section 807(3) of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.
We believe that the above-mentioned name may convey two possible impressions about the nature of the debt collector's business, both of which may be erroneous: 1) that the debt collector collects only for lawyers as clients and/or 2) that the debt collector is comprised of lawyers whose skills will be utilized in making collection attempts. According to your letter, the latter is clearly untrue; the former may or may not be untrue.
As such, we believe that the business name could have the tendency and capacity to deceive consumers into believing that dunning letters sent under such a letterhead are "from an attorney" when such is not the case, in violation of Section 807(3). Such letters could also violate Section 807(10) to the extent that they misrepresent the make-up of the debt collection agency or the character of its clients.
I hope this has been helpful.
Sincerely,
John F. LeFevre
Source: FTC staff letter as archived by the U.S. National Archives web harvest, archived copy. Works of the U.S. government.