Gunn v. Thrasher, Buschmann & Voelkel, P.C.

Plaintiffs-debtors lacked standing to bring action under Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), where defendant-debt collector sent dunning letter stating that creditor might seek foreclosure of mechanics lien, covenant, mortgage or security agreement as it pertained to plaintiffs’ $2,000 debt. While statement in dunning letter was legally and factually correct, plaintiffs asserted that it was false and misleading because debt collector would have found it too costly to pursue foreclosure to collect instant $2,000 debt. Although Dist. Ct. dismissed case on its merits, Ct. of Appeals found that case should have been dismissed for lack of Article III standing, since plaintiffs failed to alleged how said statement injured them when plaintiffs did not pay anything in response to said statement and did not allege that said statement reduced their credit rating. Fact that plaintiffs were annoyed or intimidated by said statement, or that plaintiff’s claim concerned alleged substantive right under FDCPA did not require different result.