Minnesota Law Review

Note, The Protective Scope of the Fair Debt Collection Practice Act: Providing Mortgagors the Protection They Deserve from Abusive Foreclosure Practices

The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) is intended to provide consumers broad protection from abusive and harassing practices of debt collectors. However, courts disagree over whether mortgage foreclosure constitutes debt collection under the Act. Several circuit courts hold that mortgage foreclosure is debt collection under the FDCPA, but many district courts view foreclosure as an action distinct from the collection of money and therefore hold that foreclosure is outside the protective scope of the Act. Given the unprecedented rise in mortgage foreclosures over the past two years, it is imperative that courts begin to take a unified approach to interpretation of the FDCPA. This Note argues that courts should uniformly interpret the FDCPA as protective of mortgage foreclosure activities.

The plain language and legislative history of the FDCPA command a broad interpretation of the Act inclusive of home mortgage foreclosure. This interpretation furthers the Act’s broad goal of protecting all consumers from abusive debt collection practices and recognizes that mortgagors are within the class of individuals intended to be protected by the FDCPA. The proposed interpretation further recognizes that satisfaction of debt is a creditor’s true objective in foreclosure. An inclusive interpretation of § 1692f(6) is necessary to support the proposed interpretation of the FDCPA, but such an interpretation is supported by principles of statutory interpretation. The proposed interpretation looks beyond the means used to accomplish debt collection, and in doing so, provides mortgagors the protections they need and to which they are entitled.

:: View PDF

News & Events

  • Volume 97 Lead Piece Profiled in New York Times

    The Volume 97 Lead Piece, a study of how the Supreme Court treats business interests by distinguished legal scholars Lee Epstein, William M. Landes, and Richard A. Posner, was profiled in the May 5, 2013 edition of the New York Times. The story, titled Corporations Find a Friend in the Supreme Court, [...]

  • Volume 98 Spring Submissions Closed

    The Minnesota Law Review has closed the spring submissions period for Volume 98. Submissions for Volume 98 will reopen on Thursday, August 1. Please see the submissions page for more details.

  • Volume 98 Submissions Will Open Feb. 15

    The Minnesota Law Review will begin accepting submissions for Volume 98 on Friday, February 15, 2013. Please see this page for more details.

  • Minnesota Law Review Announces Volume 98 Editorial Board

    The Minnesota Law Review is pleased to announce its Volume 98 editorial board, headed by Editor in Chief Jake Vandelist.

  • Minnesota Law Review Announces 2013 Symposium Topic

    The Minnesota Law Review is pleased to announce that its 2013 symposium will address the legal and political issues facing organized labor in the United States. The symposium will be held at the University of Minnesota Law School on October 25, 2013.

Newsletter

cforms contact form by delicious:days