Leandre v. Transworld Systems, Inc., Case No. 8:26-cv-02419

Primary Source: View Original Complaint (PDF)

Facts as Alleged in the Complaint

The following is taken verbatim from the complaint filed in federal court. These are allegations; no finding of fact has been made.

The Parties

11. The provision’s strict limitations on third-party contacts make it one of the FDCPA’s most important protections. According to the Senate report: [T]his legislation adopts an extremely important protection . . . it prohibits disclosing the consumer’s personal affairs to third persons. Other than to obtain location information, a debt collector may not contact third persons such as a consumer’s friends, neighbors, relatives or employer. Such contacts are not legitimate collection practices and result in serious invasions of privacy, as well as loss of job. S. Rep. No. 382, 95th Cong., 1st Sess. 4, at 4, reprinted in 1977 U.S.C.C.A.N. 1695, 1696.
12. Congress provided a very detailed, narrow exception to the broad general prohibition of third-party contacts in Section 1692c(b) to allow collectors to locate a debtor: Any debt collector communicating with any person other than the consumer for the purpose of acquiring location information about the consumer shall– (1) identify himself, state that he is confirming or correcting location information concerning the consumer, and, only if expressly requested, identify his employer; (2) not state that such consumer owes any debt; (3) not communicate with any such person more than once unless requested to do so by such person or unless the debt collector reasonably believes that the earlier response of such person is erroneous or incomplete and that such person now has correct or complete location information; (4) not communicate by postcard; (5) not use any language or symbol on any envelope or in the contents of any communication effected by the mails or telegram that indicates that the debt collector is in the debt collection business or that the communication relates to the collection of a debt; and (6) after the debt collector knows the consumer is represented by an attorney with regard to the subject debt and has knowledge of, or can readily ascertain, such attorney’s name and address, not communicate with any person other than that attorney, unless the attorney fails to respond within a reasonable period of time to communication from the debt collector. 15 U.S.C. § 1692c(b).
13. Contacting third parties by a debt collector has significant potential to harass and abuse consumers. After all, few persons wish to be embarrassed by having neighbors, friends and family members contacted by a debt collector. B. Developments Concerning Regulation of Communications by Debt Collectors
14. As a result of widespread changes in technology, including communications by email, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) implemented Regulation F on October 30, 2020, and December 18, 2020, interpreting the FDCPA.
15. With an effective date of November 30, 2021, the CFPB’s new rules in Regulation F set forth a clear framework that debt collectors must work within in order to communicate with consumers.
16. The regulation allows for electronic communications with specific restrictions – such as at inconvenient times or places, while the consumer is represented by an attorney, employer-provided emails, where there is a cease communication request- and provides for reasonable procedures to prevent third parties from viewing emails and text messages.
17. Regulation F also requires that the debt collector provide notice in any electronic communication to the consumer of the right to opt-out of that specific mode of electronic communication directed to that email address or telephone number for text messages, or other electronic medium address.
18. Regulation F §1006.6(d) provides that a debt collector may communicate by email to a consumer: A. if the consumer used the address to communicate with the debt collector about the debt (as opposed to marketing or other advertising materials) and the consumer has not opted out of communications to that email. Alternatively, the debt collector may send an email to an address if the debt collector received prior consent directly from the consumer to use the email and the consumer has not since withdrawn that consent; B. if the creditor sent an opt-out notice that informs the consumer that the debt has been or will be transferred to the debt collector, that the collector might communicate using the consumer’s email address, and that if others have access to the email address, such communications could be seen; or C. if the immediate prior debt collector obtained the address above, the immediately prior debt collector used the email address to communicate with the consumer about the debt, and the consumer did not opt-out of such communications.
19. As detailed below, Transworld communicated with Ms. Leandre in a manner not authorized under the FDCPA and Regulation F. B. Details of Collection Abuse and Harm Experienced by Ms. Leandre
20. Approximately four years ago, Ms. Leandre leased an automobile from Enterprise Rent-A-Car (“Enterprise”) for her personal and household use, to-wit: to drive her family on vacation (“Vehicle Rental Agreement”).
21. When the vehicle was returned to Enterprise, Enterprise assessed charges and penalties related to the use of the vehicle (“Enterprise Account”).
22. At some unknown time in the past, Enterprise retained or caused to be retained Transworld for the purpose of collecting the car rental account.
23. On or about Thursday, August 6, 2026, Transworld sent an unsolicited email (“Collection Email”) to a third-party, Tashi Fergus (“Ms. Fergus”) at email address Tashifergus@hotmail.com.
24. The Collection Email is set forth in its entirety as follows: (Remainder of page left intentionally blank)
25. The Collection Email was opened by Ms. Fergus.
26. After reading the Collection Email, Ms. Fergus confronted Ms. Leandre concerning the communication from a debt collector.
27. Ms. Fergus is the sister of the father of Ms. Leandre’s children. Because of the estrangement of Ms. Fergus and her former partner, the relationship between Ms. Fergus and Ms. Leandre is strained and prone to conflict.
28. The email exchange between Ms. Fergus and Ms. Leandre was embarrassing as Ms. Fergus accused Ms. Leandre of using the email address of Ms. Fergus without her permission: (Remainder of page left intentionally blank)
29. Ms. Leandre was humiliated as the Collection Email disclosed that she owed money to Enterprise and she worried that questions concerning her financial stability may be raised by her former partner in any future disputes involving their children.
30. The Collection Email caused a disturbance in the relationship of Ms. Leandre and Ms. Fergus.
31. Transworld had no reason to email Ms. Leandre at a stranger’s email address.
32. By information and belief, Transworld acquired the email address of Ms. Jean through a skip trace platform that mapped out known associates and family members of the debtor in order to send out unlawful third-party communication.
33. The email to Ms. Fergus was purposeful in order to cause Ms. Leandre to take action to avoid further embarrassment.

Factual Allegations

8. Traditionally, in order to collect a debt, most debt collectors were limited to communicating by mail or by phone. The efficacy of such communications is problematic. With small debts, the cost of postage for repeated and potentially unopened mail is prohibitive. With the pervasiveness of “caller id,” many persons refuse to answer calls from numbers associated with a debt collector or from unknown parties.
9. If a debt collector is unable to communicate with a consumer, the collector is unable to coax (or in worse case extort) payment. To overcome the problem, some law-breaking debt collectors reach out to third parties such as neighbors, friends and relatives to unwittingly aid in collections.
10. The FDCPA provides for strict limitations on such third-party communications: (b) Communication with third parties—Except as provided in section 1692b of this title, without the prior consent of the consumer given directly to the debt collector, or the express permission of a court of competent jurisdiction, or as reasonably necessary to effectuate a post judgment judicial remedy, a debt collector may not communicate, in connection with the collection of any debt, with any person other than the consumer, his attorney, a consumer reporting agency if otherwise permitted by law, the creditor, the attorney of the creditor, or the attorney of the debt collector. 15 U.S.C. § 1692c(b)
11. The provision’s strict limitations on third-party contacts make it one of the FDCPA’s most important protections. According to the Senate report: [T]his legislation adopts an extremely important protection . . . it prohibits disclosing the consumer’s personal affairs to third persons. Other than to obtain location information, a debt collector may not contact third persons such as a consumer’s friends, neighbors, relatives or employer. Such contacts are not legitimate collection practices and result in serious invasions of privacy, as well as loss of job. S. Rep. No. 382, 95th Cong., 1st Sess. 4, at 4, reprinted in 1977 U.S.C.C.A.N. 1695, 1696.
12. Congress provided a very detailed, narrow exception to the broad general prohibition of third-party contacts in Section 1692c(b) to allow collectors to locate a debtor: Any debt collector communicating with any person other than the consumer for the purpose of acquiring location information about the consumer shall– (1) identify himself, state that he is confirming or correcting location information concerning the consumer, and, only if expressly requested, identify his employer; (2) not state that such consumer owes any debt; (3) not communicate with any such person more than once unless requested to do so by such person or unless the debt collector reasonably believes that the earlier response of such person is erroneous or incomplete and that such person now has correct or complete location information; (4) not communicate by postcard; (5) not use any language or symbol on any envelope or in the contents of any communication effected by the mails or telegram that indicates that the debt collector is in the debt collection business or that the communication relates to the collection of a debt; and (6) after the debt collector knows the consumer is represented by an attorney with regard to the subject debt and has knowledge of, or can readily ascertain, such attorney’s name and address, not communicate with any person other than that attorney, unless the attorney fails to respond within a reasonable period of time to communication from the debt collector. 15 U.S.C. § 1692c(b).
13. Contacting third parties by a debt collector has significant potential to harass and abuse consumers. After all, few persons wish to be embarrassed by having neighbors, friends and family members contacted by a debt collector. B. Developments Concerning Regulation of Communications by Debt Collectors
14. As a result of widespread changes in technology, including communications by email, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) implemented Regulation F on October 30, 2020, and December 18, 2020, interpreting the FDCPA.
15. With an effective date of November 30, 2021, the CFPB’s new rules in Regulation F set forth a clear framework that debt collectors must work within in order to communicate with consumers.
16. The regulation allows for electronic communications with specific restrictions – such as at inconvenient times or places, while the consumer is represented by an attorney, employer-provided emails, where there is a cease communication request- and provides for reasonable procedures to prevent third parties from viewing emails and text messages.
17. Regulation F also requires that the debt collector provide notice in any electronic communication to the consumer of the right to opt-out of that specific mode of electronic communication directed to that email address or telephone number for text messages, or other electronic medium address.
18. Regulation F §1006.6(d) provides that a debt collector may communicate by email to a consumer: A. if the consumer used the address to communicate with the debt collector about the debt (as opposed to marketing or other advertising materials) and the consumer has not opted out of communications to that email. Alternatively, the debt collector may send an email to an address if the debt collector received prior consent directly from the consumer to use the email and the consumer has not since withdrawn that consent; B. if the creditor sent an opt-out notice that informs the consumer that the debt has been or will be transferred to the debt collector, that the collector might communicate using the consumer’s email address, and that if others have access to the email address, such communications could be seen; or C. if the immediate prior debt collector obtained the address above, the immediately prior debt collector used the email address to communicate with the consumer about the debt, and the consumer did not opt-out of such communications.
19. As detailed below, Transworld communicated with Ms. Leandre in a manner not authorized under the FDCPA and Regulation F. B. Details of Collection Abuse and Harm Experienced by Ms. Leandre
20. Approximately four years ago, Ms. Leandre leased an automobile from Enterprise Rent-A-Car (“Enterprise”) for her personal and household use, to-wit: to drive her family on vacation (“Vehicle Rental Agreement”).
21. When the vehicle was returned to Enterprise, Enterprise assessed charges and penalties related to the use of the vehicle (“Enterprise Account”).
22. At some unknown time in the past, Enterprise retained or caused to be retained Transworld for the purpose of collecting the car rental account.
23. On or about Thursday, August 6, 2026, Transworld sent an unsolicited email (“Collection Email”) to a third-party, Tashi Fergus (“Ms. Fergus”) at email address Tashifergus@hotmail.com.
24. The Collection Email is set forth in its entirety as follows: (Remainder of page left intentionally blank)
25. The Collection Email was opened by Ms. Fergus.
26. After reading the Collection Email, Ms. Fergus confronted Ms. Leandre concerning the communication from a debt collector.
27. Ms. Fergus is the sister of the father of Ms. Leandre’s children. Because of the estrangement of Ms. Fergus and her former partner, the relationship between Ms. Fergus and Ms. Leandre is strained and prone to conflict.
28. The email exchange between Ms. Fergus and Ms. Leandre was embarrassing as Ms. Fergus accused Ms. Leandre of using the email address of Ms. Fergus without her permission: (Remainder of page left intentionally blank)
29. Ms. Leandre was humiliated as the Collection Email disclosed that she owed money to Enterprise and she worried that questions concerning her financial stability may be raised by her former partner in any future disputes involving their children.
30. The Collection Email caused a disturbance in the relationship of Ms. Leandre and Ms. Fergus.
31. Transworld had no reason to email Ms. Leandre at a stranger’s email address.
32. By information and belief, Transworld acquired the email address of Ms. Jean through a skip trace platform that mapped out known associates and family members of the debtor in order to send out unlawful third-party communication.
33. The email to Ms. Fergus was purposeful in order to cause Ms. Leandre to take action to avoid further embarrassment.

Frequently Asked Questions

Has Defendant been found liable in this case?

No. This is a complaint — a legal filing that contains allegations made by Plaintiff. Defendant has not been found liable for any wrongdoing. A finding of liability requires a court proceeding where evidence is presented and evaluated by a judge or jury.

What does the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) prohibit?

The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq.) prohibits third-party debt collectors from using abusive, unfair, or deceptive practices. It requires collectors to send a debt validation notice and prohibits harassment, false representations, and unfair practices. Statutory damages can reach $1,000 per lawsuit plus actual damages and attorney fees.

What is the current status of this case?

This case was recently filed. See the CourtListener docket linked at the bottom of this page for the complete filing record. This page is updated automatically when new documents are filed.

Where can I read the full complaint against Defendant?

The full complaint is publicly available on CourtListener. The Facts as Alleged section above reproduces the complaint’s factual allegations verbatim. The complete case record, including all filings, is available through the docket link at the bottom of this page.

Source: CourtListener. Information on this page is taken verbatim from the court complaint. These are allegations only; no finding of fact has been made.