Complaint / Review
Forster And Garbus
Collection specialists ripoff misleading, deceptive and unfair practices in their efforts to collect consumer debts for the benefit of third parties

A class action covering California and New York has been filed in New York against collection specialists Forster & Garbus. The action is brought on behalf of all California and New York residents who received form type collection letters from Forster & Garbus which offered to settle the consumers' alleged debt for a lesser amount. The action is brought under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act and seeks statutory damages as well as injunctive and declaratory relief.

According to consumers, Forster & Garbus have engaged in misleading, deceptive and unfair practices in their efforts to collect alleged consumer debts for the benefit of third parties. The consumers allege that Forster & Garbus included in their initial collection letters an offer to settle the alleged debt for a lesser amount. However, the consumers claim that this offer contained specific time limits on accepting the settlement. The consumers claim that by including specific time limits for accepting the settlement offer, Forster & Garbus are engaging in misleading conduct. According to the consumers, it would be possible to contact the creditor directly at any time and settle their debt. Additionally, the consumers allege that by stating in their letters that payment is to be made directly to Forster & Garbus, consumers are lead to believe that they can only settle these claims directly with the collecting attorneys, when, in fact, the consumers assert that they could settle their debts with the creditor directly. Finally, the consumers allege that the letters generated by Forster & Garbus lead readers to believe that an actual attorney has reviewed their file. However, according to the consumers, the letters are "form" type and are generated by non-legal staff members.

Under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, any misleading, unfair, deceptive or untrue representations made in an effort to collect a debt are strictly forbidden. Additionally, any representations made with the intent to coerce consumers into making payments are equally forbidden. According to the consumers, the representations made by Forster & Garbus as part of their initial collection letters were both misleading and made in an effort to coerce consumers into making immediate payments.