A finance company (defendant) has been persistently making debt collection calls, despite not having an individuals’ consent to do so. The individual (plaintiff) asked for the calls concerning the alleged debt to cease. The company failed to show that its phone system was not an Automated Telephone Dialling System (ATDS). The firm based its claim on the personal knowledge of an employee who had no knowledge about dialling systems.
The plaintiff alleges that the defendant made persistent phone calls to her, without her consent, using an automated telephone dialling system (ATDS). The calls concerned a debt, which the defendant alleges was owed by her father.
Ignoring the plaintiff’s repeated requests for the phone calls to stop, the calls continued.
The defendant argued that the calls, which were made to the plaintiffs cell phone, cannot be deemed as ATDS calls since they were using a service known as LineVox. Apparently, LineVox Manual is a “human-initiated service and outbound dialling system”.
The defendant further claims the service requires an agent to manually input the required phone number, then click a button to make the call.
The case continues.
