Facts

Plaintiff filed suit against Midland Credit Management Inc. regarding its debt collection practices.

PLAINTIFF’S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff contended that defendant sent him a debt collection letter, which stated that it could not sue to collect the debt because of the statute of limitations. Plaintiff claimed the letter was misleading because it stated that defendant could nonetheless continue to report the debt to the credit reporting agencies as unpaid. Defendant’s letter was misleading and in violation of the law because it omitted information stating that another statute of limitations limited the time during which the debt could be so reported.

In his first amended complaint, plaintiff asserted class and individual claims under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and the Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

DEFENDANT’S CONTENTIONS: Defendant contended in its motion to dismiss that its letter was not false or misleading under the FDCPA or RFDCPA.

Result

The court granted defendant’s motion.