Month: May 2021

Recently, a Federal Judge held that the federal stay on evictions was unconstitutional.  That decision is stayed, pending appeal.

Connecticut also has a moratorium, which stops many evictions.  The internet link to Executive Order 10A can be found below.

https://portal.ct.gov/-/media/Office-of-the-Governor/Executive-Orders/Lamont-Executive-Orders/Executive-Order-No-10A.pdf

Several things to consider

1.  The order extends the Eviction Moratorium, preventing evictions in many cases.
2. The moratorium applies to a “dwelling unit,” – where a person lives.
3. An exception applies for a serious nuisance – although not defined, commonly this is very loud noise or illegal activity
4. There is an exception where there is a “serious nonpayment of rent” – which is defined as being late for at least six months worth of rent due on or after March 1, 2020.

I am staring to encounter evictions in which a tenant is over 6 months behind on rent payments, and is in the middle of an eviction process.  Typically the tenant has lost a job, and has been unable to pay the rent, so the rental  past due amount increases.   This pandemic situation started over 1 year ago, so it is not surprising that tenants are over 6 months behind on rental payments.

Attorney Robert M. Singer, 2752 Whitney Avenue, Hamden, CT  06518,

203-248-8278, rsingerct@yahoo.com

The Telephone Consumer Protection Act limits the ability of businesses to make unwanted sales calls.

The Supreme Court recently decided a case concerning the TCPA. In order for the TCPA to apply, a call must be from an “autodialer.”

 

The Supreme Court held that:

A device is an autodialer under the TCPA only if it can store or produce telephone numbers using a random or sequential number generator. A device that merely stores and then automatically dials telephone numbers, but does not have the capacity to use a random or sequential number generator, is not an autodialer and is therefore not subject to the TCPA’s prohibitions.

See Facebook, Inc. v. Duguid, Case Number 19-511.

 

Therefore, if a company makes calls and does not use a system which dials randomly (without any systemic method) or sequentially (one number followed by the next number), there is no TCPA violation.

For example, if a company gets a person’s home phone number, and randomly makes calls using an automated phone system, there is no TCPA violation, if the system does not dial random or sequential numbers.

Unfortunately, this will make it difficult, if not impossible, to succeed in many TCPA cases.   There will be many situations in which a company puts a phone number into an automated system, and make calls at random times; Under these circumstances, there is no TCPA violation.

There is already talk in Congress to amend the TCPA, so that it covers calls from an automated system, which does not have the capacity to make random or sequential calls.

If you have had problems with unwanted phone calls, please feel free to call

Attorney Robert M. Singer, 2752 Whitney Avenue, Hamden, CT  06518,

203-248-8278, rsingerct@yahoo.com

Serving New Haven County and all of Connecticut