15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq.
FDCPA: suing a debt collector for harassment or false statements
A federal claim in United States district courts · Last verified August 26, 2026
The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act is a strict-liability statute with a one-year clock and a $1,000 ceiling. Three details decide most of these cases, and each one disappoints somebody:
It does not cover your original creditor. The bank that issued the card is generally outside the statute when it collects its own debt.
The clock runs from the violation, not from when you learned of it.
Statutory damages are capped at $1,000 for the whole case, not per phone call.
What the claim is
A debt collector broke one of the statute's rules while trying to collect a personal debt. The prohibitions are specific and the list is long:
- Harassment — repeated calls meant to annoy, threats of violence, obscene language.
- False or misleading representations — misstating the amount, threatening a lawsuit the collector cannot or will not bring, threatening arrest, posing as an attorney or a government official.
- Unfair practices — collecting amounts not authorised, depositing a post-dated check early.
- Improper communications — calling before 8 a.m. or after 9 p.m., calling you at work after being told to stop, discussing the debt with third parties, contacting you after you asked in writing that they stop.
- Failing to send the validation notice telling you the amount, the creditor, and your right to dispute.
The debt has to be a consumer debt — personal, family, or household. A business debt is outside the statute entirely.
Where the right comes from
The private right of action is express. A debt collector that fails to comply with any provision "is liable to such person" for actual damages, statutory damages, and costs and fees.
The substantive prohibitions sit in a series of sections covering communications, harassment, false representations, unfair practices, and the validation notice.
What a plaintiff has to prove
Four elements:
- The plaintiff is a consumer.
- The obligation is a consumer debt.
- The defendant is a debt collector as the statute defines it.
- The defendant did something the statute prohibits.
Intent is not an element. This is a strict-liability statute, subject to one narrow defense below.
Whether a communication was deceptive is judged by an objective standard — not whether this plaintiff was fooled. Most circuits ask how the least sophisticated consumer would read it, a deliberately protective standard. The Seventh Circuit uses the unsophisticated consumer instead, expecting a basic willingness to read a notice with some care, so that bizarre readings do not create liability. The practical gap between the two is small but it is real.
How long you have to file
One year from the date on which the violation occurs.
Not one year from discovery. In Rotkiske v. Klemm (2019) the Supreme Court held that the text means what it says and rejected a general discovery rule. A collector who obtained a default judgment against someone at an address where they no longer lived, and who found out about it years later, was out of time.
The Court left the door open a crack: it did not decide whether equitable tolling or a fraud-based exception could apply where the collector concealed the violation. That is a narrow escape and not one to plan around.
Each separate violation starts its own year.
What has to happen before you file
Nothing. No agency complaint, no exhaustion, no notice.
The validation-notice framework — the collector's duty to tell you your rights, and your right to dispute within 30 days — governs the collector's conduct. It is not a prerequisite to your lawsuit. You do not have to dispute a debt before suing over how it was collected.
That is a real difference from the credit-reporting statute, where disputing through a bureau first is a condition of the claim.
Who can be sued — and who cannot
Debt collectors, meaning a business whose principal purpose is collecting debts, or one that regularly collects debts owed to another. Collection agencies and collection law firms are the core defendants.
Not original creditors collecting their own debts in their own name. The bank you borrowed from is generally outside the statute. Some state statutes reach original creditors; this one does not.
Debt buyers are complicated. In Henson v. Santander Consumer USA (2017) the Court held unanimously that a company that buys defaulted debt and collects it for its own account is not a debt collector under the "owed another" branch of the definition. But the Court expressly left open whether such a company qualifies under the principal purpose branch — and many do. The answer is fact-specific, and a flat "debt buyers aren't covered" is wrong.
Standing is a live obstacle. After the Supreme Court's concrete-injury decisions, a plaintiff who received a misleading letter but did nothing in reliance on it — made no payment, suffered no concrete distress — may lack Article III standing. Defendants raise this constantly, and the plaintiffs' response has been to file in state court, where standing requirements are often looser and the case cannot be removed.
Common defenses
Not a debt collector, the most common and often the strongest.
Not a consumer debt.
No concrete injury, raised as a jurisdictional motion.
The one-year deadline, measured from the violation.
Bona fide error — the statute's only affirmative defense. A collector escapes liability by showing the violation was unintentional and resulted from a bona fide error despite procedures reasonably adapted to avoid it.
That defense has a firm limit. In Jerman v. Carlisle, McNellie, Rini, Kramer & Ulrich LPA (2010) the Supreme Court held it does not cover mistakes of law. A collector who misread the statute cannot use the defense. It covers clerical and factual slips, not legal ones.
What the claim pays
Actual damages, which can include emotional distress and out-of-pocket loss.
Statutory damages up to $1,000 — and this is per action, not per violation. Ten unlawful calls still produce one $1,000 ceiling. Courts weigh the frequency and persistence of the conduct in setting the amount within that range.
Class actions are capped differently: statutory damages for the class cannot exceed the lesser of $500,000 or 1 percent of the collector's net worth.
Costs and reasonable attorney's fees to a prevailing consumer. A defendant can recover fees only where the action was brought in bad faith and for the purpose of harassment.
The structure — low individual value, mandatory fee-shifting, strict liability — is what makes this a high-volume, attorney-driven docket.
What people get wrong
"I can sue my credit card company under the FDCPA." Generally no. Original creditors collecting their own debts are outside it.
"$1,000 per violation." No. Up to $1,000 per action for an individual plaintiff.
"The clock runs from when I found out." No. It runs from the violation, under Rotkiske.
"A debt buyer is automatically a debt collector." Not under the "owed another" branch after Henson — though it may still qualify under the principal-purpose branch.
"They have to prove they meant to do it." No, it is strict liability. But a genuine clerical error can defeat the claim through the bona fide error defense.
"If the debt is mine, I have no claim." Owing the money does not license unlawful collection. The two questions are independent.
"Business debts are covered." No. Personal, family, or household debts only.
Where it came from
Congress passed the FDCPA in 1977 as part of the consumer credit statutes, after hearings documenting collection practices that ranged from relentless to abusive — calls at all hours, threats of jail, disclosure of debts to employers and neighbours. The response was to write the prohibitions in specific terms and back them with private enforcement, on the theory that individual suits would police the industry more effectively than an agency could.
Enforcement authority shifted substantially to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau under the 2010 financial reform legislation. Its Regulation F, effective in 2021, codified longstanding interpretations and added concrete guidance, including a presumption about how many calls in a seven-day period are too many.
Common questions
Can I sue the original creditor under the FDCPA?
Generally no. The statute covers third-party debt collectors — those whose principal purpose is collecting debts, or who regularly collect debts owed to someone else. A creditor collecting its own debt in its own name is usually outside it, though some state statutes reach further.
How long do I have to sue under the FDCPA?
One year from the date the violation occurred. The Supreme Court held in Rotkiske v. Klemm that the clock does not wait until you discover the violation.
Do I get $1,000 for every illegal call?
No. Statutory damages are capped at $1,000 per action for an individual, not per violation. Actual damages are separate and uncapped.
Does it matter whether I owe the debt?
No. The statute regulates how debts are collected, not whether they are valid. You can owe every cent and still have a claim over unlawful collection conduct.
Are debt buyers covered by the FDCPA?
Sometimes. A company that buys defaulted debt and collects for its own account is not a debt collector under the "owed another" definition, but it may still qualify if its principal purpose is debt collection. The answer depends on the specific company.