HLF Blog

CENTRAL PAYMENT CO. SETTLES TCPA CLASS ACTION FOR $6.5 MILLION

BY KATHRYN RATTIGAN ON MAY 11, 2017POSTED IN ENFORCEMENT & LITIGATION, TELEPHONE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT Last week, Georgia federal judge, U.S. District Judge Clay D. Land, approved the final order and judgment to settle class action claims that Central Payment Co. LLC (Central Payment) violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) for $6.5 million. Lead plaintiff, Fred Heidarpour, claimed that Central Payment violated the TCPA by hiring third parties to ‘cold call’ prospective clients using prerecorded telemarketing calls without the required prior consent. This class action was filed back in August 2015. Discovery in this case revealed that more than 27 million attempted prerecorded calls had been made on behalf of Central Payment during the proposed class period. Judge Land approved the settlement, and dismissed the case with prejudice, after no objections were received from over 310,000 proposed settlement class members. He found that the settlement was fair, adequate, reasonable and in the best interests of the settlement class. Members of the settlement class have been defined as any individual or entity who, at any time between August 18, 2011, to the date of the settlement agreement, received one or more telemarketing calls from Korthals LLC on behalf of Central Payment. It also includes individuals who received these calls, but were on the national do-not-call registry. All settlement class members will receive equal shares after payments for notice, administration, attorneys’ fees and costs, and plaintiff’s service payments are distributed. Counsel for plaintiff is permitted to collect a maximum of $2,166,666 in attorneys’ fees along with out-of-pocket expenses of up to $44,000. Heidarpour will be awarded an incentive of $25,000 “in light of the service performed by plaintiff for the class.”
Read More

NEW YORK LIFE TELEMARKETING CALLS CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

By Paul TassinJuly 6, 2017 Persons who received telemarketing calls from New York Life may be entitled to compensation under terms of a TCPA class action settlement. Plaintiff Abante Rooter and Plumbing Inc. filed this anti-telemarketing class action lawsuit in May 2016. The company alleged defendant New York Life unlawfully placed calls to mobile phone numbers that had been listed on the National Do Not Call Registry. Abante Rooter also claimed New York Life placed calls using automatic dialing equipment or prerecorded announcements to persons who had not consented to receiving such calls. In filing this action against New York Life, Abante Rooter took advantage of the civil suit provisions of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, or TCPA. Originally passed in 1991, the TCPA established the National Do Not Call Registry. Persons who do not want to receive unsolicited telemarketing calls may list their phone numbers on this registry to let telemarketers know their calls are not welcome at that number. The TCPA also requires companies to maintain their own records of persons who have opted out of receiving telemarketing calls. Another provision of the TCPA restricts callers from using automated dialing equipment and artificial or prerecorded voices when calling persons who have not expressly consented to being called that way. The TCPA has been updated to apply this prohibition to calls and text messages placed to mobile phone numbers. Persons who receive contacts that violate the TCPA may be able to sue for statutory damages of $500 to $1,500 per violation. Abante Rooter and New York Life agreed to the current TCPA class action settlement following an October 2016 mediation session. Under terms of the settlement, New York Life has agreed to put up a settlement fund totaling $3.35 million. This fund will cover payments to qualifying Class Members after...
Read More

HTTP://WWW.LAW360.COM/ARTICLES/624303/VIVINT-SETTLES-ROBOCALLING-CLASS-ACTION-FOR-6M

Law360, New York (February 24, 2015, 3:35 PM EST) — A Florida federal judge on Monday finally approved a $6 million settlement and certified a nationwide class of consumers who received autodialed or pre-recorded calls from Vivint Inc. or affiliate marketers, ending a suit that accused the home automation and security company of violating the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. U.S. District Judge William J. Zloch certified a nationwide class of consumers who, beginning in September 2008, had received a telemarketing call from Vivint or its marketing affiliates that used a pre-recorded message or was made with
Read More

HTTPS://WWW.BIGCLASSACTION.COM/SETTLEMENT/ADT-ROBOCALLS-CLASS-ACTION-LAWSUIT-TCPA.PHP

ADT REACHES PRELIMINARY $15M SETTLEMENT IN ROBOCALLS CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT April 22 2013 New York, NY: A preliminary settlement has been reached in the class action lawsuit pending against ADS Security alleging the company engaged in telemarketing calls to consumers in violation of the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). Entitled Vishva Desai v. ADT Security Services Inc., the lawsuit claims that certain ADT authorized dealers or lead generators, seeking to sell ADT’s products and services, made numerous calls to consumers via automated dialing technology (robocalling) leaving pre-recorded messages. The settlement would resolve a lawsuit brought on behalf of individuals who received telemarketing phone calls that either (1) delivered a pre-recorded message or (2) were made to a cell phone using automated dialing equipment (commonly referred to as “robocalls”), which allegedly were made by Persons or entities seeking to sell products and services of ADT Security Services, Inc. (now known as The ADT Corporation or ADT, LLC, collectively “ADT” or “ADT Security Services, Inc.”). If you received one of these phone calls since January 1, 2007, you may be eligible to participate in the settlement. If the settlement is approved a settlement fund of $15 million would be established by ADT to be divided among eligible class members. The amount to be paid per plaintiff would be determined by the number of eligible class members. It is estimated based on typical response rates that each claimant is likely to receive between $50.00 and $100.00, but the amount could be higher or lower based on the actual number of valid claim forms. However, in no event will you be entitled to receive more than the statutory maximum of $500.00. A final fairness hearing is scheduled for June 10, 2013. The Court did not decide in favor of the Plaintiffs or the Defendant. Instead, both sides...
Read More

HTTPS://TOPCLASSACTIONS.COM/LAWSUIT-SETTLEMENTS/CLOSED-SETTLEMENTS/329136-INTERSTATE-NATIONAL-DEALER-SERVICES-TCPA-CLASS-ACTION-SETTLEMENT/;

Interstate National Dealer Services Inc. has agreed to pay $4.2 million to settle a class action lawsuit that claimed the auto warranty company violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). Lead plaintiff Diana Mey filed the TCPA class action lawsuit after allegedly receiving a phone call from Interstate to her cellphone which was a number registered on the National Do Not Call Registry. Mey says that Interstate was attempting to sell her an extended warranty on her car and were in possession of her vehicle information (including her VIN number) regardless of the fact that she had never made an inquiry about a warranty. Interstate maintains that it did not make any unsolicited telemarketing calls, or authorize any service providers to do so. However, they have agreed to the settlement to avoid the cost of further litigation. Class Members who wish to “opt out” or object to the TCPA settlement must do so by Mar. 24, 2016. WHO’S ELIGIBLE The Interstate TCPA class action settlement is open to all Class Members who received one (or more) solicitation calls from Interstate between June 12, 2010 and Jan. 28, 2016 to a phone number that was listed on the National Do Not Call Registry. In addition, the TCPA settlement is also open to all Class Members who received a call from Interstate on their cell phone. POTENTIAL AWARD Varies. Interstate has agreed to establish a $4.2 million Settlement Fund. All Class Members who submit a valid and timely Claim Form will receive an equal portion of the settlement once the Court gives final approval.
Read More

TELEMARKETER ABUSE CASES

Heidarpour Law Firm handles lawsuits for consumers who have received unwanted calls from debt collectors, banks and other companies on their cell phones. Under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), individuals must provide consent to receive certain types of telephone calls, and you have the right to tell these companies, including debt collectors, to discontinue calling you. IF YOU RECEIVED UNWANTED CALLS TO YOUR CELL PHONE, GET MORE INFORMATION  AT HLF’S WEBSITE DEVOTED EXCLUSIVELY TO THESE TYPES OF CASES AT HTTP://REPORTTELEMARKETERABUSE.COM. HLF assists people who are wrongly contacted by companies looking for a different person, as well as those who were contacted after first requesting that a company stop calling them.  Anyone who was called on a wireless number, whether personal or business, may have a claim as well, if the telemarketing company did not receive the called party’s prior express written consent. Telephone Consumer Protection Act: Under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) established rules addressing “robocalling” or unsolicited automated messages used by telemarketers in 1991.  The Unwanted Telephone Marketing Calls Guide on the FCC website lists three rules all telemarketers must follow: 1. “Anyone making a telephone solicitation call must provide his or her name, the name of the person or entity on whose behalf the call is being made, and a telephone number of address at which that person or entity can be contacted 2. Telephone solicitation calls are prohibited before 8 am or after 9 pm. 3. Telemarketers must comply immediately with any do-not-call request you make during a solicitation call. 4. Telemarketers, when calling ANY wireless number for solicitation services, must receive the called parties prior express written consent.” Know Your Rights Or Debt Collectors Win: Debt collection agencies rake in money.  Big money.  It’s a $13 billion industry.  But those numbers – as staggering as they are –...
Read More

BANKRUPTCY

You should be aware of a few differences between Chapters 7, 11, and 13.  Bankruptcy is a process in which individuals or businesses declare themselves “no longer able” to make payments on outstanding debts that they owe.  The process of bankruptcy prohibits collection agencies and creditors from contacting you regarding your debts, and this process also releases you from certain types of debts. The difference between filing for Chapter 7 bankruptcy and filing for Chapter 13 bankruptcy are your income level, your current debts, and your financial goals and assets.  Individuals who fall below a certain level of income can file for Chapter 7 bankruptcy, while those who don’t can instead file for Chapter 13 bankruptcy. Chapter 7 bankruptcy is designed to help those who make little to no money at all, to pay back their debts.  Chapter 13 bankruptcy is designed for debtors who are able to pay back a portion of their debts, through a repayment plan.  That means that if you file for Chapter 7 bankruptcy, you will have your assets liquidated, if any.  While if you file for Chapter 13 bankruptcy, you retain and restructure your assets to pay off some of your debt. Call HLF at 1-202-234-2727 or fill out HLF’s FREE CONSULTATION form.
Read More

DEBT COLLECTION

If you have been trying to deal with a creditor, or creditors, and you feel that they are harassing you to try and collect on a debt you owe them, you may feel scared, hopeless, and unsure of what you can do to put an end to this sort of maltreatment. When creditors call you at work, or even make phone calls to your family members; if they verbally insult you, or if they threaten to take certain types of legal action against you, it’s time to consult with a debt collection legal firm like Heidarpour Law Firm. HLF will advocate for you if you are too afraid to deal with these types of creditors alone. Once we are engaged, we will intervene on your behalf.  If these creditors continue to unlawfully harass you,  HLF can then take legal measures to put an end to their abuse, while also reporting their illegal behaviors. If you feel you are a victim of illegal debt collection practices, you do not have to suffer alone. Call HLF at 1-202-234-2727 or fill out HLF’s FREE CONSULTATION form.
Read More

CLASS ACTION LAWSUITS

The single purpose of a class action litigation or lawsuit is to give the average person a chance to take on some of the biggest private companies and corporations in the world; giving the individual person a chance to address any wrongs done by any of these major entities. You should not attempt to handle this sort of case on your own, without the help of an experienced attorney.  The process can be overwhelming and extremely frustrating, but class action lawsuits give the average person the opportunity to hold these companies accountable, by grouping together hundreds or sometimes even thousands of people, within one lawsuit.  This gives the legal case a higher level of credibility, and demands that the defendant pay attention. For some victims involved in class action litigation or lawsuits, this is the only meaningful way for them to address fraud, widespread discrimination, or other similar legal violations.  You can look at cases of class action lawsuits against major car companies and major tobacco companies, in the past, and understand how class action litigation can help. Call HLF at 1-202-234-2727 or fill out HLF’s FREE CONSULTATION form.
Read More

CONTRACT LAW

A contract is a legally enforceable agreement between two parties.  Each party within a contract promises to perform a certain duty or service, or pay a certain amount of money to someone.  If one party member or group fails to act as promised, and the other party has fulfilled their own duties under the contract, the wronged party is then entitled to legal aide for a breach of contract.  A breach of contract is a failure to fulfill the services or monies promised within the contract terms.  A contract can be breached in the following ways: One party does not perform a duty or service as they promisedOne party breaches a “fundamental term” of the contractOne party does something that makes it impossible for the other party to perform their own services under the contractOne party makes it clear that they do not intend to perform the contract services, thereby permitting the other party to engage in an anticipatory breach Both written and oral contracts are legally enforceable.  It is best practice to write down the terms of any contract agreement, in case some dispute between the parties should arise, after agreeing to a contract.  If the contract is an oral agreement, the parties of the contract might later remember different details about the contract terms, or forget certain terms altogether, which will make it more difficult to prove the validity of the contract. Call HLF at 1-202-234-2727 or fill out HLF’s FREE CONSULTATION form.
Read More

U.S. IMMIGRATION LAW

There are four basic paths for obtaining lawful permanent residence in the United States: Through a family relationshipThrough employment sponsorshipThrough the diversity programThrough asylum Lawful permanent residents are non-U.S. citizens who have authorization to work and live in the United States indefinitely.  They can serve in the U.S. military, but they may not vote.  They have to follow certain rules to maintain their status, both when traveling abroad, and while staying outside of the U.S. for extended periods of time.  They may lose their status if they commit crimes. Obtaining permanent residence is usually a lengthy and complex process, and requires a careful analysis of an individual’s circumstances. U.S. Citizenship A person who has remained a lawful permanent resident in the U.S. for five years (or sometimes three years), and has been physically present in the U.S. for half of that time can qualify for U.S. citizenship.  A person who is married to and residing with a U.S. citizen can typically apply for U.S. citizenship after three years. HLF practices Immigration Law in the following areas: MARRIAGE IMMIGRATION: I-751 | CONSULAR PROCESSING | PARENT | 601 HARDSHIP WAIVER | 245I | MOTION TO REOPEN | SIBLING | STEPCHILDREN | FIRST PREFERENCE MARRIAGE IMMIGRATION (SUBSTITUTION): CSPA | EMERGENCY | ADVANCE PAROLE | I-90 CRIMINAL ISSUES EMPLOYMENT: EB-2 I-140 | NURSE PRACTITIONER | NATIONAL INTEREST WAIVER | PERM | REGISTERED NURSE | EB-3 I-140 | EB-11 | PHARMACISTS | L-1 VISAS: H-1B | J-1 WAIVERS | J-2 WAIVERS | K-1 FIANCE | VISA WAIVER | F-1 | B-2 VISITOR | H-4 | F-1 REINSTATEMENT DEPORTATION: TERMINATION | MOTION TO REOPEN | JAIL CASES | CANCELLATION OF REMOVAL | ARRIVING ALIEN | BIA APPEAL Call HLF at 1-202-234-2727 or fill out HLF’s FREE CONSULTATION form.
Read More