Every week, courts around the United States issue decisions addressing aspects of civil UDAAP claims.

In an effort to illuminate the UDAAP standards, below is a sampling of some of this week’s UDAAP decisions on the meaning of unfair, deceptive, and abusive.


  • A violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act is a per se violation of Massachusetts’ UDAP statute (Chapter 93A). McDermott v. Marcus, Errico, Emmer & Brooks, P.C., United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.
  • A borrower stated a claim for unfair practices under Washington’s Consumer Protection Act where he alleged that his mortgage lender accepted a deed in lieu of foreclosure with a set date for him to vacate the mortgaged property, but then entered the property and removed his belongings prior to that date. Elmore v. Bank of America, N.A., United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington.


  • A debtor did not state a claim for deceptive debt collection practices under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act where she did not identify any misrepresentation by the debt collector of the identity of the creditor or the legal status of the debt. The debtor alleged that the use of the word “Creditor” instead of the name of the creditor in the debt collector’s letters was ambiguous and that the use of the phrase “settlement offer” implied that legal action was imminent, but the court did not find either allegation convincing. Johns v. Northland Group, Inc., United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.


  • A debtor stated a claim of abusive conduct under Section 1692d of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act where she alleged that a loan servicer treated her loan as in default after she entered into a loan modification, attempted to collect and assess illegal fees and costs, and refused to respond to the debtor’s inquiries about the debt. The court found that the debtor had properly alleged that the servicer had threatened to impose penalties that it knew were improper and unlawful. Gritters v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.

Note that this Weekly UDAAP Standards Report serves to highlight only some of the many weekly developments in the law around these standards.

Please feel free to contact me for more information or to discuss these cases or any other UDAAP developments.