Carter v. AMC, LLC

Dist. Ct. did not err in dismissing plaintiff's claim alleging that defendant-servicing agent of owner of apartment building violated FDCPA by misrepresenting status of plaintiff's rent-related debt to others during state litigation, which ultimately resulted in judgment in plaintiff's favor. Defendant did not owe plaintiff any duties under FDCPA since defendant was not debt collector as that term is used by FDCPA where: (1) defendant acquired authority to collect money on behalf of creditor/apartment building owner at time agency agreement was effectuated; and (2) plaintiff's debt arose after date of defendant's agency agreement.