United States District Court, D. Minnesota
Jonathan L.R. Drewes, Esq. and Drewes Law, PLLC, Minneapolis, MN, counsel for plaintiff.
Russell S. Ponessa, Esq., Ashley M. DeMinck, Esq. and Hinshaw & Culbertson, LLP, Minneapolis, MN, counsel for defendants.
David S. Doty, United States District Judge.
This matter is before the court upon the motion for summary judgment by plaintiff Sarah McIvor and the motion for judgment on the pleadings by defendant Credit Control Services, Inc., doing business as Credit Collection Services (CCS). Based on a review of the file, record and proceedings herein, and for the following reasons, the court grants the motion by CCS.
This debt-reporting dispute arises out of an April 2013 communication between CCS and defendant TransUnion, LLC (TransUnion) regarding a debt allegedly owed by McIvor. McIvor asserts that she disputed the debt with TransUnion, a credit reporting agency, on April 2, 2013. Am. Compl. ¶ 9. Thereafter, TransUnion notified CCS of the dispute. Id. ¶ 10. McIvor alleges that CCS provided updated information to TransUnion that did not reflect that the debt was disputed. Id. ¶ 11.
On May 22, 2013, McIvor filed an amended complaint, alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) by CCS and the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) by TransUnion.  McIvor moves for summary judgment and CCS moves for judgment on the pleadings.
I. Standard of Review
The same standard of review applies to motions under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(c) and 12(b)(6). Ashley Cnty., Ark. v. Pfizer, Inc., 552 F.3d 659, 665 (8th Cir. 2009). Thus, to survive a motion for judgment on the pleadings, " a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Braden v. Wal--Mart Stores, Inc., 588 F.3d 585, 594 (8th Cir. 2009) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). " A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff [has pleaded] factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1949, 173 L.Ed.2d 868 (2009) (citing Bell A. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 556, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007)). Although a complaint need not contain detailed factual allegations, it must raise a right to relief above the speculative level. See
Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555. " [L]abels and conclusions or a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action" are not sufficient to state a claim.
Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. at 1949 (citation and internal quotation marks omitted).
McIvor argues that CCS violated the FDCPA by failing to note in the updated credit information that the debt was disputed. " A violation of the FDCPA is reviewed utilizing the unsophisticated-consumer standard which ... protects the uninformed or naive consumer, yet also contains an objective element of reasonableness to protect debt collectors from liability for peculiar interpretations of collection [attempts]." Strand v. Diversified Collection Serv., Inc., 380 F.3d 316, 317-18 (8th Cir. 2004) (citations and internal quotation marks omitted). " The unsophisticated consumer test is a practical one, and statements that are merely susceptible of an ingenious ...