United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DOC. 10)
CARAM STEEH UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
case arises primarily under the Fair Debt Collection
Practices Act (“FDCPA”). Defendant, Capio
Partners, LLC, attempted to collect a debt from Plaintiff,
Shelia Mitchell-Williams. Mitchell-Williams alleges that
Defendant violated the FDCPA, the Michigan Collection
Practices Act, and the Michigan Occupational Code by failing
to communicate to a consumer reporting agency that she
disputed the debt. Defendant moves for summary judgment,
contending that it did communicate Plaintiff's dispute to
the consumer reporting agency. The court is familiar with the
case and has determined that it will not be further aided by
oral argument. For the reasons stated below, Defendant's
motion is GRANTED.
failed to pay an alleged debt in the amount of $66.41 owed to
Beaumont Health. The debt was placed with Capio for
collection on October 21, 2016. Capio reported the debt to
credit reporting agencies TransUnion, LLC, and Experian
Information Solution Systems, Inc.
to Capio's records, it received a letter from
Mitchell-Williams dated February 20, 2017, disputing the
Beaumont Health debt. See Def.'s Ex. 4 at ¶
10 (Declaration of Bob Hodges); Def.'s Ex. 5. Capio's
records reflect that it sent electronic updates on April 4
and 5, 2017, to Experian and TransUnion indicating that the
debt was disputed. Def.'s Ex. 4 at ¶¶ 11-12,
Ex. 6, Ex. 7. Bob Hodges, Capio's president, stated in
his declaration that Capio did not receive the usual
confirmation from TransUnion that it received the electronic
update. Def.'s Ex. 4 at ¶ 14. Capio followed up with
TransUnion on April 5, 2017. According to Hodges, TransUnion
told Capio that the electronic update had failed to upload
and that TransUnion had performed the update manually.
Id. at ¶15.
10, 2017, Capio sent another electronic file to TransUnion
requesting that the credit reporting agency delete
Capio's trade line for Plaintiff's Beaumont Health
account. Def.'s Ex. 4 at ¶ 17, Ex. 8. According to
Hodges, Capio received an email confirmation that TransUnion
received the trade line deletion request. Def.'s Ex. 4 at
¶18, Ex. 9.
17, 2017, Mitchell-Williams obtained a copy of her credit
report from TransUnion. See Pl.'s Ex. 2. The
Beaumont Health debt was listed under Capio Partners as
“in collection, ” with no mention of the dispute.
Plaintiff filed this action on June 27, 2017, alleging that
Capio's failure to communicate the dispute to TransUnion
violated the FDCPA, the Michigan Collection Practices Act,
and the Michigan Occupational Code.
judgment is appropriate if “there is no genuine issue
as to any material fact and . . . the moving party is
entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.”
Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c). When reviewing a motion for summary
judgment, the court must view the facts in the light most
favorable to the nonmoving party. Matsushita Elec. Indus.
Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corp, 475 U.S. 574, 587
(1986). The court does not “weigh the evidence and
determine the truth of the matter” but determines
“whether there is a genuine issue for trial.”
Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 249
(1986). A genuine issue for trial exists only when there is
sufficient “evidence on which the jury could reasonably
find for the plaintiff.” Id. at 252.
“[T]he mere existence of some alleged factual
dispute between the parties will not defeat an otherwise
properly supported motion for summary judgment; the
requirement is that there be no genuine issue of
material fact.” Id. at 247-48
(emphasis in original).
enacted the FDCPA in order to eliminate “the use of
abusive, deceptive, and unfair debt collection practices by
many debt collectors.” 15 U.S.C. § 1692(a). The
FDCPA provides that “any debt collector who fails to
comply with any provision of this subchapter with respect to
any person is liable to such person” for actual damages
suffered plus an additional amount not to exceed $1, 000. 15
U.S.C. § 1692k(a).
other requirements, the FDCPA prohibits debt collectors from
“[c]ommunicating or threatening to communicate to any
person credit information which is known or which should be
known to be false, including the failure to communicate that
a disputed debt is disputed.” 15 U.S.C. §
1692e(8). The FDCPA also prohibits the “use of any
false representation or deceptive means to collect or attempt
to collect any debt.” 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(10).
alleges that Capio violated §§ 1692e(8) and (10) by
failing to communicate to TransUnion that the Beaumont Health
debt was disputed. In support of her claim, Plaintiff relies
on the credit report she requested from TransUnion on May 17,
2017, which does not indicate that the debt was disputed.
Pl.'s Ex. 2. Capio's records show, however, that it
communicated the dispute to TransUnion on April 5, 2017, and
that it requested that TransUnion delete the trade line on
May 10, 2017. See Def.'s Ex. 4 at ¶¶
10-18. Capio received an email from TransUnion confirming the
deletion request. Id.
Plaintiff suggests that “it is certainly
possible” that Capio's records are inaccurate,
Plaintiff has not presented specific evidence in support of
this contention. At the time Capio's motion was filed,
Plaintiff sought additional discovery in order to respond.
Discovery is now complete, having closed on January 22, 2018,
and Plaintiff has not sought to supplement the record. Under
the circumstances, Plaintiff ...