in Newswire Published on September 11, 2020

Real Estate Co. Simple House Solutions Hit with Class Action Over Alleged Robocalls

Albert v. Simple House Solutions LLC

Filed: September 9, 2020 ◆§ 3:20-cv-02807

A consumer claims Simple House Solutions placed unsolicited, prerecorded calls to his cell phone despite his number’s inclusion on the National Do Not Call Registry.

Defendant(s)

Simple House Solutions LLC

Law(s)

Telephone Consumer Protection Act

State(s)

Texas

Simple House Solutions LLC (SHS) faces a proposed class action wherein a consumer claims the real estate company has placed at least four unsolicited, prerecorded calls to his cell phone despite his number’s inclusion on the National Do Not Call Registry (DNC).

The lawsuit alleges Simple House Solutions, which makes cash offers on homes and provides assistance with property purchases, has violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act by way of its practice of cold calling consumers who’ve never provided consent to be contacted, including those whose numbers are listed on the DNC.

Citing a number of online complaints against SHS, the case claims cold calling is a “fundamental part” of the defendant’s marketing plan. In an April 2019 response to a consumer complaint on Simple House Solutions’ Better Business Bureau page, the company said it would end its “robocalling efforts” in response to the consumer’s feedback, the lawsuit says.

Nevertheless, the defendant has, one way or another, allowed the robocalls to continue in an effort to generate profits, the complaint alleges.

“SHS either makes the calls itself or knows about the prerecorded calls that are being made on its behalf, does nothing to stop them, and instead seeks to benefit financially from the leads the unsolicited prerecorded calls generate,” the suit asserts.

The plaintiff, whose cell phone number has been listed on the DNC since 2003, says he received at least four prerecorded voicemail messages from the defendant. The identical messages were made on behalf of one of the defendant’s employees in an effort to determine if the plaintiff was looking to sell his house, the suit says.

Per the case, the plaintiff “has lived in the same home for over 20 years and has no desire to sell his home,” and has not been in contact with any realtors to inquire about selling. The man says he had no prior relationship with Simple House Solutions and has never consented to any contact from the company.

“Simply put, SHS did not obtain Plaintiff’s prior express written consent to place any solicitation telephone calls to him using prerecorded voice messages,” the case reads.

The lawsuit looks to represent the following proposed classes:

“Prerecorded No Consent Class: All persons in the United States who from four years prior to the filing of this action (1) Defendant (or agents acting on behalf of Defendant) called (2) using a prerecorded voice message (3) for the same purpose that Defendant called Plaintiff.

Do Not Call Registry Class: All persons in the United States who from four years prior to the filing of this action (1) Defendant (or an agent acting on behalf of Defendant) called more than one time (2) within any 12-month period (3) where their telephone number had been listed on the National Do Not Call Registry for at least thirty days (4) for the same purpose that Defendant called Plaintiff.”

Get class action lawsuit news sent to your inbox – sign up for ClassAction.org’s newsletter here.

Case Spotlight

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