The Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991, codified as 47 U.S.C § 227 (TCPA), and its implementing regulations (to the extent applicable) have caused confusion since their enactment.1 At times, determining who may be called, texted, or faxed seems like playing a game of three-dimensional chess. Gaining an understanding of the statute and its regulations is the first step to ensure compliance and avoid potentially costly litigation and liability, which could include, among other things, individual and putative class-action lawsuits brought by consumers and governmental investigations and actions seeking monetary forfeitures. To that end, this GT Advisory seeks to give readers a basic understanding of the TCPA and some of its principal regulations. Our accompanying flowchart will further assist readers in determining whether their practices may potentially trigger liability under the TCPA. The advisory and flowchart are not comprehensive. They cannot be. Put simply, the TCPA, its regulations, regulatory rules/orders, and case law are too voluminous and complex to summarize in a relatively short advisory and one-page flowchart. Nonetheless, we hope the advisory and flowchart provide some preliminary insight into the enigma that is the TCPA.
________________________________________
1 See, e.g., Gonzalez v. Hosopo Corp., 371 F. Supp. 3d 26, 34 (D. Mass. 2019) (“In summary, the TCPA is an unusually confusing statute.”); Ruffrano v. HSBC Fin. Corp., No. 15CV958A, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 132674, at *33 (W.D.N.Y. Aug. 17, 2017) (“One commentator noted that while clarifying certain aspects of the TCPA, the 2015 FCC Order resulted in confusing, conflicting rules . . . ”) (internal quotes omitted); Baird v. Sabre Inc., 995 F.Supp.2d 1100, 1106 (C.D. Cal. 2014) (noting that FCC regulations of the TCPA are “not a model of clarity”); Weitzner v. Sanofi Pasteur, Inc., No. 3:11-cv-2198, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 138188, at *3 (M.D. Pa. Sep. 26, 2013) (“Interpretation of the language in § 227(b)(3) has caused substantial confusion . . . ”).
David Thomas serves a Co-Chair of the Boston Litigation Group. He is a litigation, trial, and appellate attorney focusing on defending companies against unfair or deceptive business practices claims in individual and putative class action settings. Among other things, David represents (1) manufacturers
David Thomas serves a Co-Chair of the Boston Litigation Group. He is a litigation, trial, and appellate attorney focusing on defending companies against unfair or deceptive business practices claims in individual and putative class action settings. Among other things, David represents (1) manufacturers and retailers facing false advertising claims arising out of alleged violations of federal and state consumer protection statutes, including the Federal Trade Commission Act and “little FTC Acts” like Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 93A – the Massachusetts Consumer Protection Act, and (2) lenders, mortgage brokers and servicers facing predatory lending and unfair servicing claims arising out of the Truth in Lending Act (TILA), Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA), and state laws governing consumer financing and mortgage loan servicing. David also has represented companies and individuals facing securities law claims in an individual and class action setting and companies responding to civil investigative demands under the False Claims Act and state laws and enforcement actions brought by federal and state regulatory agencies, including the United States Department of Justice, Massachusetts Office of the Attorney General, and other federal and state agencies.
Angela Bunnell is a member of the Litigation Practice in Greenberg Traurig’s Boston office. Her practice focuses on defending companies against unfair or deceptive business practices claims in individual and putative class action settings. She also represents companies and individuals responding to civil…
Angela Bunnell is a member of the Litigation Practice in Greenberg Traurig’s Boston office. Her practice focuses on defending companies against unfair or deceptive business practices claims in individual and putative class action settings. She also represents companies and individuals responding to civil investigative demands under various regulatory schemes, including federal and state false claims acts and related enforcement actions brought by federal and state regulatory agencies. Angela also has experience with complex eDiscovery matters, and has been responsible for preservation, collection, review, and production of ESI in state and federal lawsuits. Angela also has experience in representing clients in connection with data security and privacy matters.
Before joining the firm, Angela served as a federal law clerk, providing valuable insight and understanding of the court system and litigation process.
