Awards in Robocall Suit Would Be 'Grossly Disproportionate' to Injury: Wyndham

to a Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) complaint in U.S. District Court for Southern California in San Diego. The TCPA imposes liabilities, penalties or fines “that are excessive, severe and oppressive as to be obviously unreasonable and wholly disproportionate to the offense of sending an unsolicited facsimile advertisement,” said Wyndham, citing the due process clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. The TCPA also violates the First Amendment because it’s “more restrictive than necessary” to achieve its purposes, said Wyndham. The TCPA has “no reasonable relation to any substantial government interest,” Wyndham said, “particularly in light of technological developments which permit recipients of ‘unsolicited advertisements’ … to determine whether to print such advertisements," and technological developments that eliminate any significant burden that fax transmissions "at one time may have imposed upon the telecommunications system and infrastructure.” The TCPA violates “the First Amendment right of the public to receive, and the First Amendment right of advertisers to send, legitimate commercial communications via facsimile,” it said. Munoz’s February robocalling complaint claims Wyndham used an automatic telephone dialing system to place calls after she experienced financial hardship and defaulted on her regular monthly payments (see 2302230041).