We Defend You Against
Pressler & Pressler, LLP
The Langel Firm defends consumers against New York debt collection lawsuits brought by Pressler & Pressler, LLP. In appropriate cases, we will investigate potential claims against Pressler for violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, Fair Credit Reporting Act, and other applicable federal and state-law theories.
Call The Langel Firm at (888) 271-7109 if you need representation!
STATE COURT CASES
We secured the dismissal of a $14,000 Unifund, CCR case brought by Pressler & Pressler. We cross-moved against their motion to extend time to serve. Unifund CCR, LLC v. C.Y., 016041/15.
After suing a Queens resident for a purported $11,000 credit card debt, Pressler, representing Midland Funding, LLC, moved for summary judgment arguing that its right to collect the full amount was demonstrated by its paperwork. Our Firm quickly intervened and cross-moved to dismiss the complaint based on standing grounds and other defects. Pressler agreed to discontinue the action with prejudice.
Midland Funding, LLC v. M.H., #83959/11.
Threatening a counter-suit for suing our client in the wrong county, amongst other violations, we quickly convinced Pressler & Pressler to dismiss its $12,288 lawsuit. Midland Funding v. M.B., 254/12.
In the context of a bank restraint (frozen bank account), Pressler's failure to comply with the basics of CPLR § 5222-A led to the immediate court-ordered release of the bank account. Here, specifically, in response to the consumer's lawful claim of exemption over the restrained funds, Pressler mailed its opposition papers to the consumer's grossly outdated home address, and Pressler further failed to mail its opposition to the bank.
Midland Funding, LLC v. Digonis, 25 Misc.3d (NY Dist. Ct. 2009). See the full blog entry here. http://www.thelangelfirm.com/Debt-Defense-Blog/2012/February/Midland-Funding-LLC-and-Pressler-Pressler-LLP-ig.aspx
FEDERAL COURT CASES
In a contentious 2011 case, we won summary judgment against Pressler & Pressler, LLP for sending collection letters to the wrong man. The evidence established that our client had previously notified Pressler of its mistake of identity, but Pressler continued its communications nonetheless. This case exemplifies the strict liability nature of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Even
one knowing misdirected collection attempt will trigger liability.
Bodur v. Pressler & Pressler, LLP et al, #11-3475 (SDNY). See the full blog entry here.
Pressler & Pressler, representing Palisades Collection, LLC, faces its own federal case – as a defendant – for suing an Erie County consumer multiple times in the wrong venue in violation of the "inconvenient forum" provision of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. § 1692i(A)(2). Filing four defective lawsuits without prosecuting any of them, the court held, could further amount to harassing and abusive litigation tactics. Curto v. Palisades Collection, LLC, et al. See the full blog entry here. http://www.thelangelfirm.com/Debt-Defense-Blog/2011/December/Palisades-Collection-LLC-and-Pressler-Pressler-L.aspx
Alleging violations of Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, Fair Credit Reporting Act, conversion, negligence, gross negligence, negligent supervision, trespass, and deceptive acts and practices, we filed a 52-page complaint against Pressler, Midland Funding, LLC, and its process servers for their role in what we argued were systemic and indefensible abuses of the court system from all aspects, including the collection and enforcement of a non-existent debt, and reporting that bogus debt to the credit reporting agencies. T.T. v. Encore Capital et al., # 11-2953 (EDNY).