A proposed class action claims Credit.com has placed unsolicited telemarketing calls to consumers’ cell phones without obtaining their express consent to do so.
Per the case, the robocalls violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), a law meant to “protect individuals from the harassment, invasion of privacy, inconvenience, nuisance, and other harms associated with unsolicited, automated calls.” Under the TCPA, no entity may place a non-emergency telemarketing call using a prerecorded voice or automatic telephone dialing technology unless they obtain the recipients’ prior express consent to be contacted.
“Upon information and belief, it is a systemic practice of Defendant to call consumers without their prior express written consent, a practice designed to maximize profits at the expense of consumers,” the complaint alleges.
According to the lawsuit, Credit.com depends on third-party vendors to market its credit services, yet maintains liability for the vendors’ actions under the TCPA.
The plaintiff, a Chicago resident, says she had been looking into purchasing a life insurance policy when she filled out an online inquiry form on a website not operated or maintained by Credit.com. Nevertheless, the plaintiff began to receive in early January 2021 phone calls and prerecorded voicemails from the defendant to her cell phone, the suit relays.
The plaintiff says she answered one of the earlier calls in an effort to determine the reason behind them and was offered credit-related services. Per the case, the plaintiff said she was not interested in Credit.com’s services and requested that the calls cease.
The calls did not stop, according to the suit, and the defendant, on several occasions, allegedly left prerecorded voicemails on the plaintiff’s cell phone, stating:
“Hi, this is Credit.com. You recently submitted a request through one of our partner sites so we are calling to provide you with a free credit report consultation to help you with your credit needs. Please call us back at (844) 243-7661. . .”
The plaintiff says she received “no less than 10 invasive solicitation calls” and suffered “actual harm,” including invasion of privacy, nuisance, a waste of her time, an increased risk of personal injury due to the distraction caused by the calls, decreased productivity, aggravation, frustration, loss of concentration and loss of battery charge on her phone.
Get class action lawsuit news sent to your inbox – sign up for ClassAction.org’s newsletter here.