+1 (818) 246-1143 info@govcreative.com

Telemarketing Connections. Our free publication, Telemarketing Connections, provides a very important snapshot of the very timely dilemmas of concern to your industry.

Copilevitz & Canter’s free publication, Telemarketing Connections, provides a snapshot that is valuable of many prompt problems of concern to your industry.

Telemarketing Connections Newsletter

Our newsletter that is free Connections, provides an invaluable snapshot of the very most timely problems of concern towards the industry.

Federal Communications Commission

The Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) has required comment that is public exactly exactly just how it will manage unlawful robocalls to hospitals. Remarks are due by 1, 2021 february. See

Federal Trade Commission

The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) has posted brand brand new penalty that is civil for violations of their guidelines including actions for unjust misleading trade methods often utilized in telemarketing situations. The maximum penalty per breach for an unjust misleading work has become $43,280. See .

Comment: If the FTC considers each call to be a breach, these penalties that are civil be ruinous. Therefore it is crucial to examine compliance because of the Telemarketing product product Sales Rule although it is not likely to be utilized in a civil course action such as the phone customer Protection Act (“TCPA”) therefore commonly is.


A Florida court has enforced an arbitration contract against a plaintiff who defaulted on a car loan, then alleged calls to gather the car loan violated the Fair Debt Collection techniques Act (“FDCPA”) in addition to TCPA. Grand v. Fast Automobile Financing, Inc.

Remark: It is vital your agreements with customers have enforceable arbitration clauses to prevent nuisance and worse, TCPA allegations. Please contact me personally if you’d like us to examine your agreements pertaining to this problem.


A court has denied an expert se TCPA plaintiff’s claim to help you to register their suit underneath the TCPA and FDCPA minus the filing cost. Strange v. Juiceman.


Another TCPA that is frequent plaintiff Worsham has lost a claim against Discount energy, Inc. Worsham v. Discount energy, Inc. The defendant argued their 17-count problem centered on seven telephone calls neglected to state a claim in breach associated with the TCPA or even the Maryland phone customer Protection Act because he asserted “absolutely no facts to aid [the] allegation that [defendant] utilized an [automatic phone dialing system].”

Comment: Worsham is a disbarred lawyer who now files pro se situations by himself behalf.


a nevada cannabis dispensary is currently a defendant in a TCPA class action they visited to purchase marijuana after it texted consumers who had provided their telephone number to the business when. Stanley, et al. v. Terratech.

Comment: If, as alleged, the plaintiffs provided their number as an ailment to go into the shop, it’s not previous express permission since the quantity had been supplied not to ever facilitate interaction however for another restricted function. That you do not create limitation that would allow a plaintiff to claim a provision to the telephone number is not prior express consent if you intend to rely on this form of prior express consent, you should ensure.

Brand Brand New Hampshire

The newest Hampshire home is considering a bill (HB 510) which may modify the state’s automated telephone dialing unit statute to permit prerecorded calls just for crisis purposes or with https://loansolution.com/title-loans-az/ previous consent that is express.


A bill happens to be proposed within the ny Senate (SB 1349) which may require organizations make offered to customers totally free usage of all clients’ private information retained by the company in the event that company provides that private information to your party that is third. The limitation just isn’t limited by companies that offer customer information, in other words. any type of sharing would trigger the notice requirement.


A judge has permitted a fraudulence counter-claim to continue against Craig Cunningham, a regular TCPA pro se plaintiff. Cunningham v. United States Of America Auto Protection. The defendant alleged plaintiff made “material and constant false representations … that he knew had been false and therefore he intended [defendant] to rely upon.”

Comment: Plaintiffs frequently will “play along” with telephone calls supplying information that is false produce later on calls. This instance might be a defense that is important such situations.