Trade Practices and Antitrust Regulation
Unlawful collection practices
Notes of Decisions
Enforcement provision of Unlawful Collection Law allows aggrieved debtor to recover at least statutorily specified $200 damages on proving some type of injury including emotional upset and, in action arising from debt collection through use of telephone, allegations by plaintiff of being "bothered," "upset" and "scared" were sufficient to entitle recovery of actual damages or a minimum of $200 under ORS 646.641. Creditors Protective Assn. v. Britt, 58 Or App 230, 648 P2d 414 (1982)
Loan was not consumer transaction where proceeds were used to pay off debts for meat purchased for plaintiffs' commercial meat business and for cooler cases for that business even though meat was traded to contractors in exchange for goods and services provided in construction of plaintiffs' home. Rowe v. Bank of the Cascades, 68 Or App 490, 683 P2d 93 (1984)
If defendant bank froze plaintiffs' account in order to force plaintiffs to pay consumer debt to another bank, conduct would come within provisions of Unlawful Debt Collection Practices Act and it was error to grant defendants' motion for summary judgment. Rowe v. Bank of the Cascades, 68 Or App 490, 683 P2d 93 (1984)
Where debtor brought action against debt collector alleging violations of Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and Oregon Unlawful Debt Collection Practices Act, district court must consider pendant state claims. Swanson v. Southern Oregon Credit Service, Inc., 869 F2d 1222 (9th Cir. 1988)
As used in this section, "right" does not mean "debt." Porter v. Hill, 314 Or 86, 838 P2d 45 (1992); Manifold Business and Investment, Inc. v. Wroten, 116 Or App 573, 843 P2d 950 (1992), aff'd 316 Or 338, 851 P2d 580 (1993)
Lawyer did not attempt to enforce "right" or "remedy" by filing civil action to collect alleged debt from client even though part of debt did not exist. Porter v. Hill, 314 Or 86, 838 P2d 45 (1992); Manifold Business and Investment, Inc. v. Wroten, 116 Or App 573, 843 P2d 950 (1992), aff'd 316 Or 338, 851 P2d 580 (1993)
Filing of legal action seeking to recover allegedly unauthorized charges does not constitute collection or attempt to collect interest or charges in excess of actual debt. Hedrick v. Spear, 138 Or App 53, 907 P2d 1123 (1995)
State law is preempted with regard to third-party prelitigation efforts to collect federally guaranteed student loans. Brannan v. United Student Aid Funds, Inc., 94 F3d 1260 (9th Cir. 1996)
Notes of Decisions
Demand letter sent by attorneys to persons using satellite dishes to pirate television programming broadcasts, which demanded $300 to avoid being sued for damages, does not come under the unlawful Debt Collection Practices Act, because there was no "consumer transaction" between dish users and broadcaster of programming. Tipton v. Willamette Subscription Television, 85 Or App 79, 735 P2d 1250 (1987), Sup Ct review denied
Notes of Decisions
A complaint which alleges in one count that defendants advertised automobile for sale with intent not to sell it as advertised, in a second count that there was a failure to disclose advertised price coupled with sale at greater amount sufficiently pleads action under Act. Sanders v. Francis, 277 Or 593, 561 P2d 1003 (1977)
Plaintiff's purchase of truck to carry on business of hauling freight in order to provide family investment and employment for family member did not fall within provisions of Act. Searle v. Exley Express, Inc., 278 Or 535, 564 P2d 1054 (1977)
Amendment of definition of "trade" and "commerce" to include "advertising, offering or distributing, whether by sale, rental or otherwise, any real estate, goods or services" does not indicate legislative intent to extend application of Unfair Trade Practices Act to loans and extensions of credit. Lamm v. Amfac Mortgage Corp., 44 Or App 203, 605 P2d 730 (1980)
There is no requirement that consumer prove all elements of common law fraud in order to recover damages under Unlawful Trade Practices Act. Raudebaugh v. Action Pest Control, 59 Or App 166, 650 P2d 1006 (1982)
Plaintiff's allegations that defendant escrow company represented that plaintiff would receive security interests on notes from sale of their business did not constitute misrepresentations actionable under Unlawful Trade Practices Act. Samuels v. Key Title Co., 63 Or App 627, 665 P2d 362 (1983), Sup Ct review denied
Law Review Citations
56 OLR 490 (1977); 13 WLJ 455 (1977)
Notes of Decisions
Where users of IUDs brought suit against manufacturer on variety of grounds, claiming damages for infertility, private enforcement provision of Oregon Unlawful Trade Practices Act (UTPA) does not provide remedy for personal injuries. Allen v. G.D. Searle and Co., 708 F Supp 1142 (D. Or. 1989)
For purposes of applying Oregon Unlawful Trade Practices Act, real estate, goods or services are obtained primarily for personal, family or household purposes if (1) real estate, good or service is customarily purchased by substantial number of people for personal, family or household use and (2) person actually purchases real estate, good or service for personal, family or household use. Fowler v. Cooley, 239 Or App 338, 245 P3d 155 (2010)
Law Review Citations
51 OLR 335, 346, 408 (1972); 53 OLR 473-475 (1974); 94 OLR 589 (2016)
Notes of Decisions
Subject matter regulated by this chapter is not "preempted" by Federal Robinson-Patman Act so as to render this chapter invalid. W. J. Seufert v. Nat. Restaurant Supply Co., 266 Or 92, 511 P2d 363 (1973)
Whether an injunction should issue when a court finds a violation of the Act is a matter of discretion. State ex rel Johnson v. International Harvester Co., 25 Or App 9, 548 P2d 176 (1976)
This chapter imposes no affirmative duty to inform customers of rates in absence of request, but prohibits making information about prices available to some customers and not others. Wildish Sand & Gravel v. Northwest Natural Gas Co., 103 Or App 215, 796 P2d 1237 (1990), Sup Ct review denied