Antitrust Law Daily Wrap Up, PRIVACY—7th Cir.: Individual’s TCPA, FDCPA claims not mooted by defendant’s offer of full relief, (Oct 22, 2015)

By Michael Menzhuber, J.D., LL.M.

A decision that an individual’s Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) and Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) actions were mooted by the defendant’s offer to tender full relief for her individual claims was reversed and remanded by the U.S. Court of Appeals in Chicago. Because the individual’s claims were not mooted, the court also reversed and remanded the decision to deny her motions to amend her complaint to assert a class action TCPA claim and for class certification (Webster v. Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC, October 21, 2015, Per Curiam).

Background. Delia Webster defaulted on a mortgage, which was serviced by Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC. Despite Webster’s receiving a discharge in bankruptcy on the debt, Bayview: (1) continued to call Webster’s cell phone using an automatic dialing service and (2) sent Webster a letter regarding the debt.

Webster filed an individual complaint that alleged that Bayview’s actions violated the TCPA and the FDCPA. Webster later filed a motion for leave to file an amended complaint to assert class action claims under the TCPA. That same day, she also filed a motion for class certification.

Before responding to the motions, Bayview tendered full relief to Webster for her individual claims. After Webster rejected the tender, Bayview moved to: (1) dismiss her individual complaint on the basis that the tender offer mooted her individual claims and, accordingly, she could no longer serve as a class representative; and (2) strike Webster’s motion for class certification because the currently pending complaint only asserted individual claims.

The district court agreed and dismissed Webster’s individual claims as moot. It also denied her motions to amend her complaint and for class certification on the basis that these motions were also moot.

Individual claim. On appeal, Webster argued that the court’s decision in Chapman v. First Index, Inc., 796 F.3d 783 (2015), in which it held that a defendant’s tender of full relief does not moot litigation, mandated a reversal of the district court’s decision. The court agreed and reversed the district court’s dismissal of Webster’s individual complaint. The court noted that rejecting a fully-compensatory offer may have other consequences than mootness, but determined that a decision regarding these consequences was best left to the district court.

Because the court reversed the dismissal of Webster’s individual claims, it also vacated the denial of Webster’s motion for leave to file an amended complaint and her motion for class certification.

The case is No. 15-1396.

Attorneys: Syed Ali Saeed (Saeed & Little, LLP) for Delia Webster. Andrew Glass (K&L Gates LLP) for Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC.

Companies: Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC

Cases: Privacy IllinoisNews IndianaNews WisconsinNews