You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Desmond v. Accounts Receivable Management, Inc.

Citations: 72 So. 3d 179; 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 13050; 2011 WL 3659457Docket: No. 2D09-5919

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida; August 19, 2011; Florida; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

In this appellate case, the plaintiff, Edward S. Desmond, challenged a summary judgment favoring Accounts Receivable Management, Inc. (ARM) regarding alleged violations of Florida Statutes section 559.72, which governs consumer debt collection practices. The litigation stemmed from a clerical error by HSBC Card Services, which incorrectly linked Desmond with another individual who had an outstanding debt. Consequently, both HSBC and ARM repeatedly contacted Desmond, causing him significant distress. While HSBC settled the claim after the trial court’s ruling, ARM was initially granted summary judgment on all but one claim. The trial court concluded that ARM's actions did not reach the threshold of harassment under the statute. However, the appellate court identified potential grounds for harassment due to ARM's failure to facilitate correction of the mistaken identity, thus reversing the summary judgment on that specific issue. The appellate court remanded the case for further examination of ARM's conduct, while affirming the trial court’s decision on the remaining claims. The judgment underscores the broad protective scope of the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act, which extends to those erroneously identified as debtors. Judges Kelly and Crenshaw concurred with the appellate decision.

Legal Issues Addressed

Appellate Review and Reversal

Application: The appellate court reversed the summary judgment regarding ARM's conduct and remanded for further proceedings on this specific issue, emphasizing the need for a trial to resolve factual disputes.

Reasoning: Therefore, the court reversed the summary judgment regarding ARM's conduct and remanded for further proceedings on this specific issue, while affirming the judgment on all other claims.

Consumer Debt Collection Practices under Florida Statutes Section 559.72

Application: The statute applies to both actual debtors and those alleged to be debtors, thereby extending its protection to individuals mistakenly identified as debtors.

Reasoning: The court clarified that the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act protects not only actual debtors but also those alleged to be debtors.

Harassment in Debt Collection

Application: The court found that repeated calls without providing a means to correct a mistaken identity could potentially be interpreted as harassment under the statute.

Reasoning: The appellate court agreed that HSBC's conduct was more severe but noted that ARM’s messages could potentially be interpreted as harassment if it was found that they did not allow Desmond to explain the mistake.

Summary Judgment Standards

Application: The court upheld the summary judgment for ARM on all claims except one, indicating that most of the claims did not present a genuine issue of material fact.

Reasoning: The court upheld the summary judgment for ARM on all claims except one.