TCPA Plaintiff Lacks Standing Because She Suffered ‘No Injury,’ Says UHC’s Answer
UnitedHealthcare “denies any implication” that it violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, said the insurer’s answer Wednesday (docket 5:23-cv-00522) in U.S. District Court for Middle Florida in Ocala to plaintiff Elaine Johnson’s Oct. 11 amended class action. Johnson alleges UHC…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
“routinely violates” the TCPA by using an artificial or prerecorded voice to place nonemergency calls to cellphone numbers without their recipients’ prior express consent. But Johnson and members of her putative class “have suffered no injury, or only a de minimis injury,” and thus don’t have standing to assert claims against UHC, said its answer. UHC isn’t liable to Johnson because it acted “reasonably and with due care and substantially complied with all applicable statutes,” it said. Her TCPA claims are barred to the extent that UHC “had a good-faith basis to believe that it had consent” to contact her phone number, it said. Any UHC actions taken that allegedly were made in violation of the TCPA “were neither knowing nor willful,” it said.