Federal law limits how a debt collector may speak to you. Under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, a collector may not use obscene or profane language, use or threaten violence or other criminal means to harm anyone's body, reputation or property, or call repeatedly or continuously with intent to annoy, abuse or harass. Those limits protect anyone the collector contacts.
A consumer facing this may have just hung up on a caller who swore at them, hinted at jail, or would not stop ringing their phone, and now be replaying the call and wondering whether that was allowed. Some feel ashamed of the debt itself and assume that owing money means they have to take whatever is said to them. It does not. The law draws lines around how a collector may treat a person, whether or not the debt is owed.
This page walks through the federal rule against harassment and abuse, the related rules against false threats and unfair tactics, the options the law gives a consumer, what the law makes potentially available when a collector does not comply, and the records that may matter later.
What the FDCPA Prohibits: Harassment, Oppression, and Abuse
The core rule is short. Under 15 U.S.C. § 1692d, "A debt collector may not engage in any conduct the natural consequence of which is to harass, oppress, or abuse any person in connection with the collection of a debt."
The statute then lists six kinds of conduct that violate this section, "without limiting the general application" of the rule. That wording means the list is illustrative, not complete. The six are:
- Using or threatening violence or other criminal means to harm the physical person, reputation or property of any person, under 15 U.S.C. § 1692d(1).
- Using obscene or profane language, or language the natural consequence of which is to abuse the hearer or reader, under 15 U.S.C. § 1692d(2).
- Publishing a list of consumers who allegedly refuse to pay debts, with a narrow exception for reporting to a consumer reporting agency and certain other persons the statute identifies, under 15 U.S.C. § 1692d(3).
- Advertising a debt for sale to coerce payment, under 15 U.S.C. § 1692d(4).
- Causing a phone to ring, or engaging any person in phone conversation, repeatedly or continuously with intent to annoy, abuse or harass any person at the called number, under 15 U.S.C. § 1692d(5).
- Generally, placing calls without meaningful disclosure of the caller's identity, under 15 U.S.C. § 1692d(6), subject to a separate rule for calls made to locate a consumer.
These rules apply to a debt collector, which the law defines in 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(6) as a person in any business the principal purpose of which is the collection of any debts, or who regularly collects or attempts to collect debts owed or due, or asserted to be owed or due, another. The same section lists exclusions, including an officer or employee of a creditor collecting in the creditor's name. So the FDCPA does not reach every business that calls about money owed. Whether a particular caller is a debt collector under the statute depends on the facts.
Abusive Language in Practice: What the Statute's Examples Cover
A call that leaves someone shaking usually fits one of a few patterns, and the statute's examples map onto them closely.
Swearing at a person, using slurs, or writing a letter full of insults is conduct that may violate 15 U.S.C. § 1692d(2), which reaches obscene or profane language and also language whose natural consequence is to abuse the hearer or reader. That second part matters. Language does not have to include a curse word to be abusive. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's regulation repeats this rule in 12 C.F.R. § 1006.14(d).
Threats of harm to a person, to their reputation or to their property may violate 15 U.S.C. § 1692d(1) when the collector uses or threatens violence or other criminal means.
Repeated calls may violate 15 U.S.C. § 1692d(5) when they are made with intent to annoy, abuse or harass. Intent is the condition, and whether a call pattern meets it depends on the facts. The regulation adds a measuring stick: under 12 C.F.R. § 1006.14(b), a collector is presumed to comply if it calls a particular person about a particular debt no more than seven times within seven consecutive days, and not within seven consecutive days after a phone conversation with that person about the debt. Calling beyond either limit creates a presumption of a violation. Some calls do not count toward these limits, including calls that never connect to the dialed number.
Calls in which the caller will not say who they are may violate 15 U.S.C. § 1692d(6), subject to the rule for calls made to locate a consumer.
The word "any person" runs through these rules. A spouse, a parent, a coworker or someone with no connection to the debt is protected too. When relatives are pulled in, the separate rules on debt collectors calling family also apply.
Abusive calls often carry false threats along with them, and a separate section addresses those. Under 15 U.S.C. § 1692e, a debt collector may not use any false, deceptive or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt. The section then lists specific prohibited representations, including two that often appear in heated calls:
- Under 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(4), representing or implying that nonpayment will result in arrest or imprisonment, or in the seizure, garnishment, attachment or sale of any property or wages, unless the action is lawful and the debt collector or creditor intends to take it.
- Under 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(7), falsely representing or implying that the consumer committed any crime or other conduct in order to disgrace the consumer.
The list also covers falsely claiming to be an attorney, threatening action that cannot legally be taken or is not intended, and misstating the amount or legal status of a debt, among others.
A third section sets a broader floor. Under 15 U.S.C. § 1692f, a debt collector may not use unfair or unconscionable means to collect or attempt to collect any debt. Its listed examples include collecting any amount not expressly authorized by the agreement creating the debt or permitted by law, and communicating with a consumer about a debt by post card.
One communication can touch more than one section. A caller who swears at someone and says police are on the way may implicate 15 U.S.C. § 1692d for the abuse and 15 U.S.C. § 1692e for the false threat. Each of these is an FDCPA rule that governs debt collectors as 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(6) defines them, and whether any particular call violates any of them depends on what was said, by whom and why.
What a Consumer Can Do: Options the FDCPA Provides
For someone who dreads the next ring, the most practical question is how to make the contact stop or slow down. The statute gives several options.
A written request to stop contact. Under 15 U.S.C. § 1692c(c), if a consumer notifies a debt collector in writing that the consumer refuses to pay a debt or wishes the collector to cease further communication, the collector may not communicate further about that debt except to advise that its further efforts are being terminated, to notify the consumer that the collector or creditor may invoke specified remedies it ordinarily invokes, or, where applicable, to notify the consumer that it intends to invoke a specified remedy. If the notice is mailed, it is complete upon receipt. The CFPB explains that asking a collector to stop contact will not necessarily stop it from suing or reporting the debt to a credit reporting company.
A written dispute. Under 15 U.S.C. § 1692g, within five days after its initial communication a collector generally must send a written notice stating the amount of the debt, the creditor's name and the consumer's dispute rights, unless that information was in the initial communication or the debt was paid. If the consumer disputes the debt in writing within thirty days after receiving that notice, or asks for the original creditor's name and address, the collector must stop collecting the debt, or the disputed portion, until it mails verification, a copy of a judgment, or the original creditor's name and address. Not disputing may not be treated by a court as an admission of liability.
A complaint to an agency. The CFPB's page on harassment states that a person who believes a debt collector is harassing them can submit a complaint with the CFPB. The FTC's debt collection page describes reporting a collector as one option alongside a lawsuit.
Each of these is an option, and which one fits any situation depends on its facts.
What the FDCPA Makes Potentially Available: Civil Liability
The remedies section is 15 U.S.C. § 1692k. Under 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(a), a debt collector who fails to comply with any provision of the FDCPA with respect to any person is liable to that person for the sum of any actual damage sustained as a result, such additional damages as the court may allow in an individual action, not exceeding $1,000, and, in a successful action, the costs of the action and a reasonable attorney's fee as determined by the court. Different limits apply in a class action. If a court finds an action was brought in bad faith and for harassment, it may award the collector attorney's fees and costs.
Additional damages are not automatic. Under 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(b), in an individual action the court considers, among other relevant factors, the frequency and persistence of the collector's noncompliance, its nature and the extent to which it was intentional. Under 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(c), a collector is not liable if it shows by a preponderance of evidence that the violation was not intentional and resulted from a bona fide error despite procedures reasonably adapted to avoid it. The FTC's page adds that even if a court finds a violation, the consumer may still owe the debt.
Timing is set by 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(d): an action may be brought in an appropriate federal district court, or another court of competent jurisdiction, within one year from the date on which the violation occurs. More on how these cases work appears in the page on a consumer lawsuit under federal law.
State law may add protections and differs from state to state. In California, Cal. Civ. Code § 1788.17 is California's rule requiring every debt collector collecting or attempting to collect a consumer debt to comply with 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692b to 1692j, inclusive, and making it subject to the remedies in 15 U.S.C. § 1692k. It exempts persons described in 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(6)(A) and (B), and their principals, only from 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(11) and 15 U.S.C. § 1692g. The federal references are read as they stood on January 1, 2001.
Whether a particular situation is a violation, and what remedies may be available, depends on its facts.
Memory fades fast after an upsetting call, and the details are often what decide whether conduct crossed a line. The CFPB's page on harassment says that keeping a record of letters, documents and communications, and writing down the dates and times of conversations with notes about what was discussed, can help when disputing a debt or going to court.
Information that may be relevant later includes:
- Call details: the date, time and phone number of each call, including missed calls.
- Notes of what was said: written as soon as possible after the call, in the caller's words where they can be recalled.
- Voicemails: saved rather than deleted, since a recording shows tone and wording exactly.
- Written communications: letters, envelopes, emails and texts from the collector, including the envelope, because 15 U.S.C. § 1692f limits what may appear on it.
- Identifying information: the caller's name, the company's name and any account or reference numbers mentioned.
A consumer may also find it useful to keep copies of any letters they send, such as a dispute or a request to stop contact, along with proof of the date it was received. The CFPB notes that collectors keep records too, and that statements a person makes on a call can be tracked. These records also show how the call frequency compares with the limits in 12 C.F.R. § 1006.14(b), and when the one-year period in 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(d) may have started.
If You'd Like a Consumer Rights Case Review
A call full of threats or insults can feel personal, but under the FDCPA the questions are specific: who called, whether that business is a debt collector, what words were used, how often the phone rang and when it all happened. This page explains the federal rules on abusive collection conduct; it does not cover credit-report disputes or calls from businesses outside the FDCPA, which are separate subjects on this site and in the overview of consumer rights law.
A reader may request a consumer rights case review through Federal Consumer Rights.
