Suttell & Hammer Facing Class Action Over Collection Suit Filed Against Oregon Consumer

New to ClassAction.org? Read our Newswire Disclaimer

Suttell & Hammer, P.S. is a defendant in a proposed class action that centers on a collection lawsuit the firm filed against an Oregon consumer over a debt supposedly owed to Discover Bank. 

The lawsuit, filed against the firm itself and one of its employees, states the defendants filed a collection complaint against the plaintiff on behalf of Discover Bank in December 2017. In its lawsuit, Suttell & Hammer, the case says, supported its “Account Stated” claim by alleging that monthly statements were sent to the plaintiff, that Discover Bank kept an account of debits and credits involved in transactions on the woman’s account, and that no disputes had been filed. 

According to the complaint, the defendants' allegations in the collection action against the plaintiff were “false, unfair, deceptive and misleading.” The suit argues that the presented facts “appeared to be true but they did not support a claim [that the] plaintiff had agreed to state the account with Discover Bank.” From the plaintiff’s lawsuit against Suttell & Hammer:

“In order to disprove Defendants’ assertion that the account had been stated Plaintiff had to depos [sic] Discover Bank. That deposition revealed that Discover Bank did not send the periodic statements as an effort to confer with Plaintiff on the transactions of the account in order to resolve their dealings by reaching an agreement on the sum due and establishing a new promise by Plaintiff to pay that agreed sum with the new promise to pay replacing their contractual relationship. In fact, Discover Products sent the periodic statements for informational purposes only.”

The plaintiff's lawsuit also takes issue with the defendants' unjust enrichment claims, arguing that the law firm did not allege any misunderstanding between the parties. “Upon information and belief,” the plaintiff's complaint states, “...Defendants have never prevailed on a claim for unjust enrichment in a credit card debt collection lawsuit.” The case calls the claim “an abusive and unfair collection practice.”

Lastly, the lawsuit claims Suttell & Hammer asserted in its case against the plaintiff that it owed a process server a $65 fee for each collection suit filed at the law firm’s request. The plaintiff argues the firm had no contractual right to recover the charge, as processing fees are statutorily limited at $45, and as such, claims the defendant has wrongfully imposed a $65 processing fee in more than 100 collection actions filed within the last year.