Dyck O’Neal is a “debt collector”

August 23, 2015

As a defedant in dozens of lawsuits in Florida filed under the FDCPA, Dyck O’Neal regularly disputes that it is a “debt collector.”  Establishing that Dyck O’Neal is a “debt collector” is a requirement for the plaintiff to obtain a judgment under the FDCPA.

Dyck O’Neal is a “Debt Collector” as defined by the FDCPA. “Debt collectors” are defined by the FDCPA as “any person who uses any instrumentality of interstate commerce 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.” 15 U.S.C § 1692a(6). Because the instrumentalities of interstate commerce include telephone and the mails, virtually all commercial collection activities fall within the realm of the FDCPA.
Dyck O’Neal is the holder of a License as a Consumer Collection Agency issued by the Florida Office of Financial Regulation effective December 31, 2014 and originally issued on November 23, 1994. Florida Statutes §559.55(4) defines the license holder as:
(3) “Consumer collection agency” means any debt collector or business entity engaged in the business of soliciting consumer debts for collection or of collecting consumer debts, which debt collector or business is not expressly exempted as set forth in s. 559.553(3).

This definition is strikingly close to the definition found in the FDCPA:

(6) The term “debt collector” means any person who uses any instrumentality of interstate commerce or the mails 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 web coding on all of the pages on Dyck O’Nea’s webpage describes it as “The Leading Nationwide Purchaser, Collector and Servicer of Real Estate Loans.”


Action for Deficiency Judgment by Dyck O’Neal Dismissed

August 20, 2015

A Circuit Judge in Orlando, Florida, dismissed an action for a deficiency judgment, with prejudice, filed by Dyck O’Neal.  The defendant resided in California and purchased property in Florida for personal use.  Falling on hard times, the defendant was unable to make the mortgage payments and a foreclosure judgement was entered against him and the property was sold at auction.  Thereafter, 6 years later, Dyck O’Neal filed the action for a deficiency judgment seeking $203,000.   In its order, the Court reasoned that the while the defendant, at one time, had minimum contacts with the State of Florida by owning real estate sufficient to subject him to Florida Courts, he no longer owned the property after the original foreclosure action.    Dyck O’Neal v. Larry Rojas, Case No. 2014-CA-1369.