Antitrust Law Daily Wrap Up, PRIVACY—D. Minn.: TCPA case dismissed after consumer turns down $5.5K settlement, (Aug 8, 2014)

By Greg Hammond, J.D.

A consumer’s Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) case against collection company Texas Gila, LLC was dismissed after the consumer turned down a $5,500 settlement offer. In granting Texas Gila’s motion for summary judgment, the court determined that the consumer consented to Texas Gila’s use of his cell phone number (Ranwick v. Texas Gila, LLC, August 7, 2014, Kyle, R.).

Background. Brian Ranwick received two parking tickets from the City of Minneapolis in early 2012, when his sister used his vehicle. The Minnesota Department of Revenue (DOR) attempted to collect the debt and confirmed Ranwick’s telephone number on three separate occasions. After its failed attempts to collect, the DOR hired Texas Gila to recover the fines and provided the company with Ranwick’s cell phone number. The company contacted Ranwick on twelve occasions and left prerecorded messages. Ranwick filed a putative class action suit against Texas Gila, alleging violations of the TCPA. Texas Gila moved for summary judgment after Ranwick turned down a $5,500 settlement offer.

TCPA violations. Under the TCPA, it is unlawful “for any person within the United States…to make any call (other than a call made for emergency purposes or made with the prior express consent of the called party) using any automatic telephone dialing system or an artificial or prerecorded voice…to any telephone number assigned to a…telephone service.” In support of its motion for summary judgment, Texas Gila argued that Ranwick consented to its telephone calls when he voluntarily provided his telephone number to the DOR on various occasions.

The court agreed with Texas Gila, finding that, because Ranwick consented to being called using prerecorded voice messages by the DOR, he consented to being called by Texas Gila as the DOR’s agent. Specifically, the court considered the FCC’s previous rulings regarding “prior express consent,” and found that “a person who knowingly provides his telephone number to a creditor in connection with a debt is agreeing to allow the creditor to contact him regarding his debt, regardless of the means.” Because Ranwick confirmed his contact information for the DOR and never attempted to revoke consent or limit the DOR’s or Texas Gila’s use of his telephone number, the court concluded that Texas Gila did not violate the TCPA. Summary judgment was therefore entered in favor of Texas Gila.

The case number is 13-2792 (RHK/SER).

Attorneys: Nicholas R. Nowicki and Brandon T. McDonough (McDonough & Nowicki PLLC) for Brian Ranwick. Issa K. Moe, Michael S. Poncin, and James R. Bedell (Moss & Barnett, PA) for Texas Gila, LLC.

Companies: Texas Gila, LLC

Cases: Privacy ConsumerProtection MinnesotaNews