Forster, Garbus & Garbus Failed to Disclose Written Debt Dispute Requirement, Lawsuit Alleges
by Nadia Abbas
Last Updated on November 9, 2018
Nussenzweig v. Forster and Garbus LLP
Filed: November 5, 2018 ◆§ 3:18-cv-15677-MAS-LHG
A proposed class action out of New Jersey federal court accuses Forster, Garbus & Garbus of miscommunicating a consumer’s debt dispute rights.
A proposed class action out of New Jersey federal court accuses Forster, Garbus & Garbus of miscommunicating a consumer’s debt dispute rights.
The case focuses on an August 2018 collection letter sent to the plaintiff concerning a debt purportedly owed to Discover Bank. The suit says the notice was deceptive in that it failed to disclose that a consumer’s dispute must be submitted in writing. Additionally, the case claims the letter falsely implied “that the writing requirement is voluntary.”
“As a result of Defendant’s false statements, Plaintiff effectively waived his rights to this statutorily available information because he was not properly informed of the ‘G-Notice’ requirements set forth in the [Fair Debt Collection Practices Act],” the complaint charges.
Hair Relaxer Lawsuits
Women who developed ovarian or uterine cancer after using hair relaxers such as Dark & Lovely and Motions may now have an opportunity to take legal action.
Read more here: Hair Relaxer Cancer Lawsuits
Stay Current
Sign Up For
Our Newsletter
New cases and investigations, settlement deadlines, and news straight to your inbox.
Before commenting, please review our comment policy.