If a debt collector keeps calling you about someone else's debt, federal law gives you real protection. The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act limits when a collector may talk to anyone other than the person who owes the debt. The Telephone Consumer Protection Act limits autodialed and prerecorded calls to a cell phone that the person answering never agreed to receive.
Most people facing wrong-number collection calls have done nothing to cause them. The phone rings, a voice asks for a stranger, and the caller says it is about a debt. Some people start to wonder whether their own name has somehow been attached to the account. This page explains why these calls happen, what the two main federal laws say about them, and what options the law gives a person who is not the one the collector is looking for.
When a Debt Collector Has the Wrong Number
Wrong-number collection calls usually come from one of three situations.
- A recycled number. Phone companies reassign numbers. The person who held the number before may have owed a debt, and the collector is still dialing the number that was on file.
- An outdated or wrong number for someone else. The collector may have a number that never belonged to the debtor, or one that was mistyped or linked to the wrong person.
- Identity confusion. Sometimes the collector believes the person who answers is the debtor. That can happen through a shared or similar name, or through a mixed file, which means one person's information has been merged with another person's records.
Collectors may use location databases, sometimes called skip-tracing tools, that tie phone numbers to people. Those links can go stale when a number changes hands, and the database may never catch up. In plain terms, the person getting these calls did not take on the debt and is not the person the collector is trying to reach. Where a stranger's account appears to be tied to a person's own name or Social Security number, the issue overlaps with debt collection and identity theft.
The FDCPA covers "debt collectors," and the statute defines that term in 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(6). A debt collector is a person "in any business the principal purpose of which is the collection of any debts, or who regularly collects or attempts to collect, directly or indirectly, debts owed or due or asserted to be owed or due another." The definition has exclusions, so not every caller who mentions a debt is covered.
Third-party contact is limited. Under 15 U.S.C. § 1692c(b), a debt collector generally may not communicate about collecting a debt with anyone other than the consumer, the consumer's attorney, a consumer reporting agency if otherwise permitted by law, the creditor, the creditor's attorney, or the collector's attorney. That rule is subject to exceptions: the consumer's prior consent given directly to the collector, a court's express permission, steps reasonably necessary for a postjudgment judicial remedy, and calls to find the consumer.
Those location calls have their own rules under 15 U.S.C. § 1692b. A collector seeking location information from someone else must identify itself and say it is confirming or correcting location information. It may name its employer only if asked. It may not say the consumer owes a debt. It generally may not contact that person more than once, unless the person asks or the collector reasonably believes the earlier answer was wrong or incomplete and the person now has correct or complete information.
Harassment rules protect more than the debtor. Under 15 U.S.C. § 1692d, a collector "may not engage in any conduct the natural consequence of which is to harass, oppress, or abuse any person." That includes calling repeatedly or continuously with intent to annoy, abuse or harass "any person at the called number." The broader rules are covered under debt collection harassment.
Under 15 U.S.C. § 1692g, a collector must give the consumer a written validation notice stating the amount, the creditor and a 30-day dispute period. Repeated calls to a stranger may violate these rules, depending on what was said, how often the collector called, and what it knew. Whether any particular caller's conduct violates the FDCPA depends on the facts.
How the TCPA Applies to Automated and Prerecorded Collection Calls
Robocalls to cell phones need consent. Under 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(A)(iii), it is unlawful to make any call using an automatic telephone dialing system or an artificial or prerecorded voice to a number assigned to a cellular telephone service. The exceptions are calls made for emergency purposes and calls made "with the prior express consent of the called party."
The TCPA defines an automatic telephone dialing system as equipment which has the capacity to store or produce telephone numbers to be called, using a random or sequential number generator, and to dial such numbers. The Supreme Court read that definition in Facebook, Inc. v. Duguid, No. 19-511 (U.S. Apr. 1, 2021). Calls using an artificial or prerecorded voice fall under the rule whatever equipment placed them.
The consent problem in a wrong-number case is simple to state. The former owner of a number may have agreed to calls, but the person who has the number now did not. The statute speaks of the consent of "the called party."
How a person withdraws consent is set out in 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200(a)(10). A called party may revoke consent "by using any reasonable method to clearly express a desire not to receive further calls or text messages." Replying "stop," "quit," "end," "revoke," "opt out," "cancel" or "unsubscribe" to a text counts as a reasonable means, and so does a caller's automated opt-out or designated website or number. Revocation requests "must be honored within a reasonable time not to exceed ten business days from receipt," and covered callers may not designate an exclusive means to revoke. The FCC's robocall guide likewise says a person may opt out of any robocall or robotext at any time and in any reasonable manner. Whether a particular call or text violates the TCPA depends on the facts.
What a Consumer Can Do When the Calls Keep Coming
Several options exist, and they work differently.
A written dispute. Under 15 U.S.C. § 1692g(b), a consumer who notifies the collector in writing within the thirty-day period after receiving the validation notice that the debt is disputed, or who asks for the original creditor's name and address, stops collection of the disputed amount until the collector mails verification, a copy of a judgment, or the creditor's name and address. Validation notices are covered under collection letter violations.
A cease-communication letter. Under 15 U.S.C. § 1692c(c), if a consumer notifies a collector in writing that the consumer refuses to pay or wants communication to stop, the collector may not communicate further about that debt. The exceptions let it say its efforts are ending, or say that it or the creditor may invoke, or intends to invoke, a specified remedy. If the notice is mailed, it takes effect on receipt. This right belongs to the "consumer," meaning the person said to owe the debt. A person who is not the debtor may instead tell the collector in writing that they are not the person being sought and that the number is not the debtor's.
Revoking consent to robocalls. Under 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200(a)(10), as described above, a called party may revoke consent in any reasonable way.
Records and complaints. The CFPB's guidance on collector harassment notes that records of letters and calls, with dates, times and notes, can help, and that a person may submit a complaint with the CFPB. A caller ID log and copies of messages fit the same pattern. The FTC's Do Not Call FAQs describe reporting illegal calls to the FTC.
What the FDCPA and TCPA Allow as Remedies
Under 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(a), a debt collector that fails to comply with the FDCPA "with respect to any person" is liable for any actual damage the person sustained because of that failure. In an individual action, the court may allow additional damages "not exceeding $1,000." In a successful action, the court may also award costs and a reasonable attorney's fee. The court weighs the frequency and persistence of noncompliance, its nature, and whether it was intentional.
The statute also limits liability. A collector is not liable if it shows the violation was not intentional and resulted from a bona fide error despite procedures reasonably adapted to avoid it. An action must be brought "within one year from the date on which the violation occurs." And if a court finds an action was brought in bad faith to harass, it may award the collector fees and costs.
The TCPA has its own private actions. One covers violations of the automated-call and prerecorded-voice rules. A separate one covers do-not-call violations. Each has its own damages amounts and conditions, including a higher award a court may allow for willful or knowing violations. More detail on prohibited conduct is under illegal debt collection practices.
None of these is automatic. Whether a particular situation gives rise to a claim, and what remedy might apply, depends on its facts.
When State Law May Add Protections
Federal law sets a floor that applies across the United States. The FDCPA and the TCPA protect people in every state. States may add their own consumer protection laws on top of that floor, and those laws differ from state to state.
California's rule is Cal. Civ. Code § 1788.17, part of the Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. It requires every debt collector collecting or attempting to collect a consumer debt, as California's law uses those terms, to comply with 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692b to 1692j. It also makes those collectors subject to the remedies in 15 U.S.C. § 1692k. California's statute exempts two groups described in the federal definition's exclusions (A) and (B), together with their principals, from one federal disclosure requirement and from § 1692g. Its federal references are to those laws as they read on January 1, 2001. That is California's rule only. Other states' rules are their own.
If You'd Like a Consumer Rights Case Review
Wrong-number calls raise two separate questions: what a debt collector may say to someone who is not the debtor, and whether automated calls reached a phone without the current owner's consent. A conversation with an attorney can cover the calls and texts received and their dates, any recorded messages, any letter sent to the collector and its response, and any log that has been kept. This page does not address lawsuits already filed or debts that actually belong to the reader.
To discuss wrong-number collection calls with an attorney, contact Federal Consumer Rights to request a consumer rights case review.
