Disclaimer

The information on this website is presented as a service for our clients and Internet users and is not intended to be legal advice, nor should you consider it as such. Although we welcome your inquiries, please keep in mind that merely contacting us will not establish an attorney-client relationship between us. Consequently, you should not convey any confidential information to us until a formal attorney-client relationship has been established. Please remember that electronic correspondence on the internet is not secure and that you should not include sensitive or confidential information in messages. With that in mind, we look forward to hearing from you.

 Skip to Content

Life Insurer Settles Nationwide "Junk Fax" Class Actions
December 22, 2014

Recently, there has been a noticeable increase in lawsuits, particularly putative class actions, brought against life insurance companies pursuant to the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 (TCPA). As amended by the Junk Fax Prevention Act of 2005, the TCPA prohibits the transmission of advertisements via facsimile without the prior express permission of the recipient. It provides for a private right of action and statutory damages of $500 per violation.

In August, an Illinois court entered an order preliminarily approving a settlement and certifying a settlement class in two putative TCPA class actions involving MetLife. The Illinois settlement, which includes a $23 million settlement fund, resolved allegations that an insurance producer, formerly employed by MetLife, sent unsolicited advertisements for life insurance via facsimile to numerous individuals and businesses. The cases, Fauley v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. (filed in Illinois state court) and C-Mart Inc. v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. (filed in Florida federal court), arose from faxes that generically advertised “low cost life insurance rates,” but did not reference MetLife, the producer, or any other insurance company. The producer had purportedly retained a “fax blasting” service to generate leads.

In a memorandum submitted in support of preliminary approval of the settlement, MetLife explained that it “vigorously disputes any liability” for the alleged conduct, but “entered into [the] agreement to settle with the nationwide class based on the risks and uncertainties of litigation ….” MetLife contended that the $23 million settlement fund “exceed[ed] the average monetary recoveries that have been approved by other courts across the country in other TCPA class actions.”
Authored By
Image: Stephanie A. Fichera
Stephanie A. Fichera
Related Practices
Life, Annuity, and Retirement Litigation Telephone Consumer Protection Act
Related Industries
Life, Annuity, and Retirement Solutions
©2024 Carlton Fields, P.A. Carlton Fields practices law in California through Carlton Fields, LLP. Carlton Fields publications should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information and educational purposes only, and should not be relied on as if it were advice about a particular fact situation. The distribution of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship with Carlton Fields. This publication may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the firm, to be given or withheld at our discretion. To request reprint permission for any of our publications, please use our Contact Us form via the link below. The views set forth herein are the personal views of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the firm. This site may contain hypertext links to information created and maintained by other entities. Carlton Fields does not control or guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this outside information, nor is the inclusion of a link to be intended as an endorsement of those outside sites.