FDCPA and FCCPA: Temperatures rising

FDCPA & FCCPA Claims Gaining Traction: Lessons from Goodin v. Bank of America

Across the country, homeowners are increasingly finding success under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) and state-level consumer protection laws such as Florida’s FCCPA. A clear example is Goodin v. Bank of America (M.D. Fla.), where Judge Corrigan issued a carefully reasoned opinion that underscores both the liability of servicers and the availability of meaningful damages.

In Goodin, Bank of America continued to misapply payments, refused to correct its errors despite repeated homeowner requests, and pursued foreclosure on a false “default.” The Court held this conduct to be grossly negligent and awarded the two homeowners:

• $2,000 in statutory damages

• $100,000 in actual damages for emotional distress ($50,000 each)

• $100,000 in punitive damages

• Attorneys’ fees and costs

Read the decision here

---

Why This Case Matters

The Goodins’ experience mirrors that of thousands of homeowners nationwide: servicers misapply or ignore payments, label accounts as “late” or “delinquent,” and then refuse further payments. From there, they accelerate the loan and initiate foreclosure.

But as the Court’s reasoning shows, a borrower who tenders timely, good funds has not defaulted. If the servicer fails to apply those payments correctly, the servicer—not the borrower—is at fault. In such cases, there is no legitimate “default” or delinquency.

---

Emotional Distress Damages

Notably, the Court awarded substantial damages for emotional distress without requiring medical expert testimony or bills. Years of sleepless nights, anxiety, and the sense of powerlessness against a major institution were deemed sufficient proof. This is a powerful recognition of the human cost inflicted by servicers’ negligence and misconduct.

---

Punitive Damages

While the Court stopped short of calling Bank of America’s conduct intentional, it described the actions as so grossly negligent that they approached intentional and malicious behavior. That finding justified a punitive award, meant to deter repeat misconduct.

---

Practice Note: The Merger Doctrine & “Default”

The Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) provides important guidance often overlooked by courts. Under UCC §3-310, when a promissory note is issued for an obligation (such as a mortgage), the underlying obligation is suspended while the note is outstanding. Payment of the note discharges both the note and the obligation; default occurs only if the note is dishonored.

This means:

• Until a note is dishonored, there is no default on the underlying mortgage.

• A foreclosure cannot proceed unless the borrower has failed to pay according to the note’s terms.

Banks often exploit judicial unfamiliarity with the UCC, persuading courts to presume default simply because their internal ledgers show no posted payment. In reality, if the borrower tendered payment and the servicer refused or misapplied it, the note is not dishonored—and foreclosure should fail.

---

⚖️ Key Takeaway

Goodin v. Bank of America highlights two critical points:

1. Borrowers who tender timely payments are not in default, regardless of servicer errors.

2. Homeowners can recover meaningful damages—including for emotional distress and punitive relief—when servicers act with gross negligence or worse.

For practitioners, this case reinforces the need to raise FDCPA/FCCPA claims aggressively and to invoke UCC principles that shift the focus back where it belongs: on whether the borrower actually dishonored the note.

Need Help With Your Case?

Call us today at 844.583.5339
Submit your case statement online for a complimentary recommendation.
Visit LivingLies.me for resources and case insights.

Tags: actual damages, ATTORNEY FEES, Bank of America, costs, disclosure, emotional distress, FCCPA, FDCPA, foreclosure defense, fraud, Goodin, Medical bills, punitive damages, statutory damages
Posted in Bankruptcy |