UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C.
20580
Division of Credit Practices
Bureau of Consumer
Protection
|
|
November 13, 1996
Mr. Donald B. Kramer, Esq.
National Association of Retail Collection Attorneys
1515 N. Warson Road
Suite 109
St. Louis, MO 63132
Dear Mr. Kramer:
This is in response to your letter of October 10, 1996, concerning
whether the words "attorney at law" on a law firm's
stationery or the words "collection agency" on a collection
agency's stationery fulfill the requirements of the recent amendment
to Section 807(11) of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (15
U.S.C. 1692e(11)), if the content of the message in the letter
at issue relates to a debt. Section 807(11) requires debt collectors
to disclose in all communications to a consumer, subsequent to
the initial written and oral communications, that they are from
a debt collector.(1) You ask for
a formal advisory opinion from the Commission concerning this
matter.
Without addressing, for the time being, whether your request
satisfies Part I, Subpart A of the Commission's Rules of Practice
concerning advisory opinions, we are providing you with the opinion
of Commission staff on the issues you raise. Of course, you are
aware that such an opinion is not binding upon the Commission
or a court, but it contains what we will recommend to the Commission
if we ultimately handle this request as a request for a formal
advisory opinion from the Commission itself.
Like the courts have done with other provisions of the Act, we
read amended Section 807(11) for its plain meaning, i.e.,
that subsequent communications must disclose [clearly] that they
are from a debt collector. We believe that the words "collection
agency' on a collection agency's stationery would comply with
the amended Section 807(11). However, we do not believe that the
words "attorney at law" on a law firm's stationery would
comply; these words disclose only that the communication is from
a lawyer, working for a law firm. The consumer would have to draw
an inference that, since the text of the message discusses a debt,
the attorney must also be a debt collector. We do not believe
that the amendment to the FDCPA requires that consumers make such
an inference in order to understand what information is being
disclosed or permits a disclosure that would require such an inference
in order for the information at issue to be effectively conveyed.
The disclosure must be clear and unambiguous on its face.
In light of our informal staff opinion in this matter, please
let me know if you still wish to pursue your request for a formal
Commission advisory opinion. If you do, you must comply with Section
1.2 et. seq. of the Commission's Rules of Practice (enclosed)
and submit your petition to the Secretary of the Commission, Federal
Trade Commission, Washington, D.C. 20580. You should be aware
that it would undoubtedly take a number of months for an advisory
opinion to be issued,. if the Commission were to grant your request
for advice.
Sincerely,
John F. LeFevre
Attorney
Enclosure
1. In the initial communication with
the consumer, the debt collector must disclose that it is attempting
to collect a debt and that any information obtained will be used
for that purpose.
|