Stella Case No. 007, Originally Published: 2 October 2002
Wendy Ehringer of Seattle, Wash., took some friends out for burgers. Her $15.02 check to the restaurant bounced, so the restaurant turned the debt over to its collection agency.
When she got the notice from Associated Credit Service demanding the full amount plus $40 in fees, Ehringer says she thought to herself, “I thought I better take care of this,” and mailed a money order to ACS for the full amount. She didn’t think a thing more about it until several months later when she was notified she had been sued.
While ACS’s lawsuit showed she had a balance of “$0.00”, it claimed she was a day or two late in getting the money order to them. The suit was filed get the interest on the supposedly late payment — 18 cents.
“When I saw I was being sued for 18 cents, I was outraged,” Ehringer says. In addition to the 18 cents, the collection agency was demanding $311.26 in attorneys fees and other costs. It was war. “At that point, I knew there was no stopping this train,” she said.
Ehringer, a paralegal, knew plenty of lawyers, so she asked one to help her. Attorney Amanda Lee sent a letter to ACS, but when they ignored it Lee filed a countersuit. “Once they cashed that check, they didn’t have any basis” to claim more fees, Lee said. “You can’t file a lawsuit if you’re not actually owed the money.”
The collection agency wouldn’t budge, and the case came before Judge Eileen Kato in Seattle District Court. Judge Kato ruled that ACS had violated the Consumer Protection Act and the Collection Agency Act, and threw out the 18-cent suit. She also ordered ACS to pay Ehringer $500 in damages, and ruled the collection agency would have to pay Ehringer’s attorney for her time — a total of 36 hours’ worth, Lee figures, for a total of over $7,000. A hearing was set to assess the exact total.
“The $500 in damages might not get their attention,” Lee said. “But if they have to pay attorney fees, it might.”
There are plenty of deadbeats out there, and collection agencies play a vital role to keep innocent businesses from being victimized by them. But when a slimy agency tries to pull a fast one, they deserve to be slapped down. Hard. A tin-plated 18-cent Stella Award goes to ACS. And official Stella Kudos to Ehringer and Lee for fighting back, and to Judge Kato for upholding justice.
- “Suit over 18 Cents Redefines ‘Small-Claims’ Court”, Seattle Times, 26 September 2002.
Decided in defendant’s favor on countersuit.
A reader sent a blistering e-mail to the agency castigating them for their actions, openly copying me. I really, really wish you wouldn’t involve me in your campaigns against others, in part because the collection agency responded to this reader (with a copy to me): “You have contacted the wrong company. The company you are looking for is out of the state of Washington. We are [in New England]. I have no idea what you are referring to.”
On the other hand:
Max in California: “On the radio today the morning talk show was doing a piece on extreme lawsuits. The DJs, Mark & Brian, were complaining about how terrible such lawsuits were, yada yada yada. After listening for just a couple of minutes, I recognized the lawsuits [they were discussing were] the very cases you present as FABRICATED on your web site. So I called in and told them that these very lawsuits were not true, and mentioned your site as a source for verification. They blew me off. Was I out of line with this one? I thought that radio (indeed, media in general) had an ethical responsibility to promote truth rather than contribute to rumor and innuendo. Is it possible that they simply didn’t know that they were presenting as fact information that can easily be determined to be false (or, at the least, suspect)? It’s gotta be just me.”
No, it’s not you, it’s Mark & Brian (a very popular morning show team on KLOS in Los Angeles). I know this because your quick mention on the air brought DOZENS of new subscribers! It just goes to show that Mark & Brian underestimated their own audience — people are very interested in this topic, and want accurate information! What’s the point of using made-up cases to argue about a very real problem? Especially when there are so many true cases you can talk about? So yes: when you hear the bogus cases being read yet again, please do call in and set the lazy hosts straight! Radio hosts who want to actually inform their audiences should know too that I’m available to be on the air to talk about this stuff.
Anne in Western Australia writes, “Your site specifies [you’re reporting] only U.S. cases at present. I guess because it’s easier for you to validate them. However, while the U.S. may have been a trailblazer for these sorts of cases, the disease is spreading fast. Do you plan to extend your coverage to non-US cases in the future? I’m sure there are many similar cases in other countries.”
It isn’t really a “verification issue.” While I’m sure that there are cases of lawsuit abuse — or seeming abuse — in other countries, I need to be realistic in what I can tackle. This is an American publication written by an American author. I’m a reasonably knowledgeable lay person (read: not a lawyer) who has something to say about the problems I see around me. To fairly discuss the legal systems in other countries would require at least cultural-level knowledge about the legal system in each of those countries. I have said all along that I’m talking about the U.S. Justice System and that will remain so for the foreseeable future, with minor exceptions possible (such as Americans involved in foreign courts). I do know from my mail, however, that readers in other countries are finding the cases most interesting and entertaining.
My 2020 Thoughts on the Case
This one’s so abusive it feels great to see the defendant win — but it should have been more than $500. Amazingly, the “family owned” collections agency still seems to be in business today. Following the previous suit that was about pennies, it’s amusing that this one followed directly, but coincidences happen!
- - -
No new cases are being published, so please don’t try to submit cases for inclusion on this site.
While there are no new cases coming, all of the previously published cases are returning to this site over time. You can subscribe to notifications as those classic cases are posted, scheduled for Mondays and Thursdays. Click here for a Stella Awards subscribe form.
Meanwhile, my flagship email publication This is True does continue to come out with new stories every week. It’s “Thought-Provoking Entertainment” like Stella, but uses weird-but-true news items as its vehicle for social commentary. It is the oldest entertainment newsletter online — weekly since 1994. Click here for a This is True subscribe form.