Michael Nadalin v. Automobile Recovery Bureau, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that a repossessor does not act on behalf of a creditor or otherwise play the role of a debt collector by charging an administrative fee for its own services
• explaining No. 17-2598 5 that a repossessor does not act on behalf of a creditor or oth- erwise play the role of a debt collector by charging an ad- ministrative fee for its own services
• “So far as the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act is concerned, the only thing that’s important is that the repossessor was not acting as the lender’s agent when in effect it asserted a lien in order to enforce its $25 fee.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).