ILNews

Agency collecting credit card debt not a creditor, COA rules

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A debtor’s counterclaim that a collection agency violated the Indiana Uniform Consumer Credit Code by not obtaining a license was rejected by the Indiana Court of Appeals on the grounds that although the agency was trying to recover a debt, it was not a creditor.

Asset Acceptance LLC, a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business in Michigan, tried to recover $6,594.26 from Nathan Wertz, who had defaulted on his credit card from Chase Bank/First USA/Chase.

Wertz claimed Asset Acceptance could not collect on payments for consumer loans debts because it is not licensed under the IUCCC. Accordingly, Wertz argued Asset Acceptance’s collection efforts violated both the Indiana Deceptive Consumer Sales Act and the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

The Indiana Court of Appeals disagreed in Nathan Wertz v. Asset Acceptance, LLC, 71A03-1305-CC-175. The COA affirmed the trial court’s grant of the agency’s Trial Rule 12(B)(6) motion to dismiss Wertz’s counterclaim.

Wertz raised the question on appeal of whether Asset Acceptance “regularly engage(d) in Indiana” in taking assignments of consumer loans or in the collection of payments from debtors arising from consumer loans as described in Indiana Code 24-4.5-3-502. If so, then it was required to have a license from the IUCCC.

Citing Sheetz v. PYOD LLC, 3:12-cv-811-JD-CAN, 2013 WL 5436943 (N.D. Ind. Sept. 26, 2013), the Court of Appeals rejected the argument that the plain language of the IUCCC extends the licensure requirement to entities not physically located in Indiana.

“…Section 3-502(3), which is the licensure requirement relevant here, does not require ‘creditors’ to obtain a license and instead focuses on the actions undertaken by the entity in question,” Judge Edward Najam wrote for the court. “These actions, in particular that of taking an assignment or collecting on a debt, may or may not be the actions of a creditor.”

 

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Hail to our Constitutional Law Expert in the Executive Office! “What you’re not paying attention to is the fact that I just took an action to change the law,” Obama said.

  2. What is this, the Ind Supreme Court thinking that there is a separation of powers and limited enumerated powers as delegated by a dusty old document? Such eighteen century thinking, so rare and unwanted by the elites in this modern age. Dictate to us, dictate over us, the massess are chanting! George Soros agrees. Time to change with times Ind Supreme Court, says all President Snows. Rule by executive decree is the new black.

  3. I made the same argument before a commission of the Indiana Supreme Court and then to the fedeal district and federal appellate courts. Fell flat. So very glad to read that some judges still beleive that evidentiary foundations matter.

  4. KUDOS to the Indiana Supreme Court for realizing that some bureacracies need to go to the stake. Recall what RWR said: "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!" NOW ... what next to this rare and inspiring chopping block? Well, the Commission on Gender and Race (but not religion!?!) is way overdue. And some other Board's could be cut with a positive for State and the reputation of the Indiana judiciary.

  5. During a visit where an informant with police wears audio and video, does the video necessary have to show hand to hand transaction of money and narcotics?

ADVERTISEMENT