Class-Action Plaintiff Sues to Stop Security Installation Firm From Violating TCPA
Core Home Security, a security installation and monitoring company, violates the Telephone Consumer Protection Act and Florida Telephone Solicitation Act by placing unwanted telemarketing calls to consumers who don’t want to receive them and gave the company no consent to…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
be called, alleged Victoria Starr-Harris’ class action Wednesday (docket 0:24-cv-60250) in U.S. District Court for Southern Florida in Fort Lauderdale. Starr-Harris' residential cellphone number has been listed on the national do not call registry since October 2016, yet she began receiving prerecorded telemarketing calls to that number on June 12 from Core, promoting its security monitoring services, said her complaint. At no point did the Davie, Florida, resident give the company her express written consent to be contacted, as the TCPA requires, it said. The company’s unsolicited phone calls and text messages caused her “actual harm,” including invasion of her privacy, aggravation, annoyance, intrusion on seclusion, trespass and conversion, it said. The calls also inconvenienced her and caused disruption to her daily life, it said. She estimates that she spent “numerous hours” investigating the unwanted phone calls, including how they obtained her number and who the defendant was, it said. The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in its July 24 en banc decision in Drazen v. GoDaddy.com (docket 21-10199), held that plaintiffs have a concrete Article III injury under the TCPA with only a single unwanted call or text message from a defendant, said the complaint.