Telemarketing Connections. Our free publication, Telemarketing Connections, provides an invaluable snapshot of the most extremely prompt dilemmas of concern to your industry.

Telemarketing Connections. Our free publication, Telemarketing Connections, provides an invaluable snapshot of the most extremely prompt dilemmas of concern to your industry.

Copilevitz & Canter’s free publication, Telemarketing Connections, supplies a snapshot that is valuable of many prompt problems of concern to your industry.

Telemarketing Connections Newsletter

Our newsletter that is free Connections, provides a very important snapshot of the very prompt problems of concern towards the industry.

Federal Communications Commission

The Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) has required general public remark regarding just just just how it must control illegal robocalls to hospitals. Responses are due by 1, 2021 february. See

Federal Trade Commission

The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) has posted new penalty that is civil for violations of its legislation including actions for unjust misleading trade methods often utilized in telemarketing instances. The maximum penalty per breach for the unjust misleading work has become $43,280. See .

Comment: If the FTC considers each call to become a violation, these penalties that are civil be ruinous. Thus it is crucial to examine conformity aided by the Telemarketing Sales Rule although it is not likely to be utilized in a class that is civil such Pennsylvania auto title loans as the phone customer Protection Act (“TCPA”) therefore commonly is.


A Florida court has enforced an arbitration contract against a plaintiff whom defaulted on a car loan, then alleged calls to get the car loan violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) plus the TCPA. Grand v. Rapid Automobile Financing, Inc.

Remark: It is vital that your agreements with customers have enforceable arbitration clauses to prevent nuisance and worse, TCPA allegations. Please contact me personally if you’d like us to examine your agreements pertaining to this dilemma.


A court has denied an expert se TCPA plaintiff’s claim in order to file their suit beneath the TCPA and FDCPA without having the filing cost. Strange v. Juiceman.


Another regular TCPA plaintiff Michael Worsham has lost a claim against Discount energy, Inc. Worsham v. Discount energy, Inc. The defendant argued their 17-count problem centered on seven phone telephone calls didn’t state a claim in breach regarding the TCPA or the Maryland phone customer Protection Act because he asserted “absolutely no facts to aid [the] allegation that [defendant] utilized an [automatic phone dialing system].”

Comment: Worsham is really an attorney that is disbarred now files pro se situations by himself behalf.


a Las vegas, nevada cannabis dispensary is currently a defendant in a TCPA class action they visited to purchase marijuana after it texted consumers who had provided their telephone number to the business when. Stanley, et al. v. Terratech.

Comment: If, as alleged, the plaintiffs supplied their number as an ailment to go into the store, it’s not previous express permission since the quantity ended up being supplied to not facilitate interaction however for another restricted purpose. That you do not create limitation that would allow a plaintiff to claim a provision to the telephone number is not prior express consent if you intend to rely on this form of prior express consent, you should ensure.

New Hampshire

The newest Hampshire home is considering a bill (HB 510) which may alter the state’s automated telephone dialing unit statute to permit prerecorded calls just for emergency purposes or with previous consent that is express.


A bill happens to be proposed within the ny Senate (SB 1349) which may require companies make open to customers cost-free access to all clients’ private information retained by the company in the event that company provides that private information to virtually any party that is third. The restriction is certainly not restricted to organizations that offer customer information, in other words. any as a type of sharing would trigger the notice requirement.


A judge has permitted a fraudulence counter-claim to proceed against Craig Cunningham, a regular TCPA pro se plaintiff. Cunningham v. United States Of America Auto Protection. The defendant alleged plaintiff made “material and constant false representations … that he intended [defendant] to are based upon. that he knew had been false and”

Comment: Plaintiffs usually will “play along” with telephone calls supplying false information to produce later on calls. This situation might be a defense that is important such situations.

Leave a Reply

Warning: Undefined variable $user_ID in /homepages/1/d124163003/htdocs/akusyumi/blog/wp-content/themes/starocean/comments.php on line 53