3rd Circuit Holds Unpaid Highway Tolls are Not “Debt” for FDCPA Purposes

The Third Circuit recently affirmed a district court decision which found that unpaid highway tolls do not constitute a type of “debt” that could support a consumer claim brought under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA).  Accordingly, the Third Circuit affirmed the district court’s dismissal of the plaintiff’s class action complaint, which alleged violations of the FDCPA.

The case was initially brought by a plaintiff who had failed to pay highway tolls through his E-ZPass account, an electronic toll collection system.  When E-ZPass assigned the plaintiff’s debt to a private debt collection agency, the debt collector sent a collection letter to the plaintiff in an envelope which revealed not only the plaintiff’s name and address, but also a “quick response” code along with the plaintiff’s account number.  The code, when scanned by a device such as a smart phone, revealed the plaintiff’s name, address, and the monetary amount corresponding to the alleged debt.

The FDCPA prohibits the use of any unfair or unconscionable means to collect debt, including any language or symbol, other than the debt collector’s address, on any envelope, when communicating with a consumer by mail.  The plaintiff alleged that disclosure of his name and address along with the code violated the FDCPA.  However, the prohibition only applies to the collection of a “debt,” which the FDCPA defines as an obligation of a consumer to pay money arising out of a transaction that is primarily for personal, family, or household purposes.

The district court dismissed the plaintiff’s complaint, finding that unpaid highway tolls do not constitute a “debt” under the FDCPA.  On appeal, the Third Circuit agreed with the district court, explaining that the obligation to pay highway tolls was non-consensual and more akin to a tax rather than a voluntary exchange.  In addition, the Third Circuit noted that the primary purpose of the transaction is not so that the plaintiff receives the private benefit of a personal, family, or household service or good, but instead, the public benefit of highway maintenance and repair.  Therefore, the Third Circuit concluded that toll liability does not constitute an obligation primarily for personal, family, or household purposes, and does not qualify as a “debt” under the FDCPA.

The case is St. Pierre v. Retrieval-Masters Creditors Bureau, Inc., and is available here.