The revised “de Mayo letter” provides more detailed guidance as to when a debt is considered to be in “default”, and potentially subject to the FDCPA, and when a collection agency employee can be considered to be a “de facto” employee of the creditor client, and therefore potentially exempt from the FDCPA.
It was held that consistent with the Court’s precedent and the First Amendment, states may maintain fraud actions when fundraisers make false or misleading representations designed to deceive donors about how their donations will be used.
Holding that a provision of the TCPA regarding unsolicited fax advertisements was unconstitutional, a federal judge in Missouri effectively held, by extension, that the standards applied to other laws affecting telemarketing must be constitutional.
Regarding the FTC’s proposals to amend the Telemarketing Sales Rule as it relates to the use of predictive dialers, the alleged nuisance should be balanced against the benefits of predictive dialing to come to a reasonable interpretation.
An Indiana firefighters’ nonprofit challenges the constitutionality of the Do-Not-Call list, which applies to the phone number (not the resident attached to the phone number) without regard to the resident’s history with the nonprofit and variously to some telemarketing calls while exempting others.
Predictive dialers have helped the industry make more calls using fewer telemarketers.However until this year, the use of predictive dialers was largely unregulated by state or federal law.
A state can tax a sale if it has sufficient “nexus” with that state. If the telemarketing firm - or its clients - has a physical presence in the state, sales and/or use tax may need to be collected depending on the particular campaign in question.
May 24, 2001, the governor of Louisiana signed a law creating a state do-not-call list requiring all purchasers of the list to post a $20,000 bond to be applied to penalties for future violations.
This firm argued to challenge the immediate disconnect law in Arkansas. The law, unusually, applies to charitable solicitations by telephone, rather than solely to telemarketing by commercial entities, putting an unfair and undefined burden on a telemarketer to determine what constitutes cause for disconnect.
Two cases in which state legislatures can get things right and pass legislation that clarifies a murky area of the law, or that attempts to unify treatment of an aspect of the business which was previously treated inconsistently.