Telemarketing Connections. Our newsletter that is free Connections, provides an invaluable snapshot of the most extremely prompt dilemmas of concern into the industry.

Copilevitz & Canter’s free publication, Telemarketing Connections, supplies a snapshot that is valuable of many timely dilemmas of concern towards the industry.

Telemarketing Connections Newsletter

Our newsletter that is free Connections, provides a very important snapshot of the very timely dilemmas of concern to your industry.

Federal Communications Commission

The Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) has required general public remark regarding just exactly just how it must manage illegal robocalls to hospitals. Responses are due by 1, 2021 february. See

Federal Trade Commission

The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) has posted brand new civil penalty amounts for violations of the regulations including actions for unjust misleading trade methods often found in telemarketing instances. The penalty that is maximum violation for the unjust misleading work is currently $43,280. See .

Comment: If the FTC considers each call to be a breach, these civil charges could be ruinous. Therefore it’s very important to examine conformity because of the Telemarketing Sales Rule although it is not likely to be utilized in a civil class action such as the phone customer Protection Act (“TCPA”) therefore commonly is.


A Florida court has enforced an arbitration contract against a plaintiff whom defaulted on a car loan, West Virginia title loans then alleged calls to get the car finance violated the Fair Debt Collection methods Act (“FDCPA”) plus the TCPA. Grand v. Fast Automotive Loans, Inc.

Remark: It is essential your agreements with customers have enforceable arbitration clauses to prevent nuisance and worse, TCPA allegations. Please contact me personally if you’d like us to examine your agreements pertaining to this dilemma.


A court has denied an expert se TCPA plaintiff’s claim in order to register their suit underneath the TCPA and FDCPA minus the filing cost. Strange v. Juiceman.


Another TCPA that is frequent plaintiff Worsham has lost a claim against Discount Power, Inc. Worsham v. Discount energy, Inc. The defendant argued their 17-count problem predicated on seven phone phone calls neglected to state a claim in breach associated with the TCPA or even the Maryland phone customer Protection Act because he asserted “absolutely no facts to guide [the] allegation that [defendant] utilized an [automatic phone dialing system].”

Comment: Worsham is an attorney that is disbarred now files pro se instances by himself behalf.


a Las vegas, nevada cannabis dispensary happens to be a defendant in a TCPA class action after it texted customers that has supplied their phone number to your company when they visited to get cannabis. Stanley, et al. v. Terratech.

Comment: If, as alleged, the plaintiffs offered their number as a disorder to enter the shop, it’s not prior express permission since the number had been provided to not facilitate interaction but also for another purpose that is limited. In the event that you plan to depend on this as a type of previous express permission, you need to make certain you usually do not produce limitation that will allow a plaintiff to claim a supply to your cell phone number is perhaps not previous express consent.

Brand Brand New Hampshire

The brand new Hampshire home is considering a bill (HB 510) which may change the state’s automated telephone dialing unit statute to permit prerecorded calls just for crisis purposes or with prior express permission.


A bill is proposed within the ny Senate (SB 1349) which will require companies make offered to customers totally free use of all clients’ private information retained by the company in the event that company provides that private information to your party that is third. The limitation just isn’t restricted to companies that sell customer information, in other words. any type of sharing would trigger the notice requirement.


A judge has permitted a fraudulence counter-claim to continue against Craig Cunningham, a regular TCPA pro se plaintiff. Cunningham v. United States Of America Auto Protection. The defendant alleged plaintiff made “material and constant false representations … that he intended [defendant] to are based upon. which he knew had been false and”

Comment: Plaintiffs frequently will “play along” with telephone calls supplying false information to create later on calls. This instance might be a essential protection against such instances.