Have robo signers invaded the credit card collections arena?
A federal class action claims Capital One Bank and the Goldman & Warshaw law firm use "false information and documentation" in credit-card collections.
In the suit, Charles Fratz of Warrington, Pa., charges that Capital One and its attorneys cited documents and contracts that did not apply to the case at hand.
For example, in a collections letter to Fratz, Capital One referred to a credit application supposedly signed by Fratz in November 2002. But a closer look at the application finds a copyright notice dated 2005 at the bottom.
“The attached Agreement significantly post-dates the dates that the credit card was allegedly issued and could not have been the operative Agreement,” the suit charges, alleging that the apparently random substitution of documents violates the Federal Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA).
Fratz' suit cites previous, similar lawsuits against Capital One as evidence the bank was aware that it was using false documentation.
The suit seeks class action status on behalf of all consumers who have been the subject of collection lawsuits brought by the bank and its attorneys. It asks for compensation for consumers' legal costs, punitive damages and interest.