Stacy Makhnevich v. Gregory S. Bougopoulos, et al.

Both sections 1692e and 1692f of Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) expressly prohibit specific conduct relating to debt collection. Section 1692e states that “[a] debt collector may not use any false, deceptive, or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt.” Section 1692f provides, without limitation, that “a debt collector may not use unfair or unconscionable means to collect or attempt to collect any debt.” The FDCPA "enable[s] *135 the courts, where appropriate, to proscribe other improper conduct which is not specifically addressed.1 In 1986 Congress repealed the attorney exemption in response to the explosion of law firms conducting debt collections.2 Question presented is: 1. Whether a debt collector misrepresentations to consumers that an entity (such as an Unincorporated Association) on behalf of which the debt collection action was filed is authorized to proceed in its name in state courts (with such misrepresentations reflected in both original and amended debt collection complaints) whereas such entity can not sue or be sued in its name is violative of FDCPA? 1 Senate report 2 Pub. L. No. 99-361, 100 Stat. 768 (1986).