Berlinsky v. Woods

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the FDCPA defines a debt collector as a party collecting debts owed to another, which does not include a party attempting to collect an obligation it owns
• observing that legislative history “indicates conclusively that a debt collector does not include the consumer’s creditors, a mortgage servicing company, or an assignee of a debt, as long as the debt was not in default at the time it was assigned.”
• Late charge of 4% on mortgage loan which is merely a bona fide fee for servicing late payments, is “not properly characterized as ‘interest’ ”
• “[A] debt collector does not include the consumer’s creditors, a mortgage servicing company, or an assignee of a debt, as long as the debt was not in default at the time it was assigned.”
• under Texas law, late charges are not a component of interest
• “The legislative history of section 1692a(6) indicates conclusively that a debt collector does not include the consumer’s creditors, a mortgage servicing company, or an assignee of a debt, as long as the debt was not in default at the time it was assigned.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).