Posts
'via Blog this'A man in Michigan was recently awarded $65,500 after he sued a robocalling company for allegedly making 56 calls to his cellphone in a two-month span.
The suit, filed in a U.S. District Court in Michigan, alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act and Michigan's Collection Practices Act. The robocaller claimed it had been given clearance by a customer to call that particular number, but the plaintiff says the calls continued even after he told the telemarketer it had been given inaccurate information.
The judge in the case issued a summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff, awarding him $500 for each call, plus triple damages for each call placed after the plaintiff notified the callers of their error.
That came to $62,500, plus an additional $2,500 in other damages. Court costs and other money could still be added to the robocaller's tab
"It's a big win for consumers and puts banks and others in the collection business on notice once again that harassing phone calls will not be tolerated," says the plaintiff's attorney Ian Lyngklip in a statement.
"It's a big win for consumers and puts banks and others in the collection business on notice once again that harassing phone calls will not be tolerated," says the plaintiff's attorney Ian Lyngklip in a statement.
Post a comment1 - 50
2. Sue every company that calls the number
3. ????