Hey TCPAWorld!

Stop dragging your wheels and process your DNC requests!

In TAYLOR v. BONIFACE-HIERS CYCLES INC. D/B/A HONDA OF MELBOURNE, No. 6:25-CV-00005-PGB-LHP, (M.D. Flo. Jan. 1, 2025), Taylor (“Plaintiff”) alleges that even though Plaintiff requested to be listed on the company’s internal DNC list on 11/05/2024, Honda of Melbourne (“Defendant”) placed three additional calls to Plaintiff’s residential number—one on 11/23/2024, and two on 11/30/2024.

Due to these accusations, Plaintiff filed a Complaint in the Middle District of Florida alleging Defendant violated the DNC provisions, 47 U.S.C. 227(c) and 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200(d), claiming the three telemarketing calls made by Defendant to Plaintiff are evidence of a failure to honor opt-out requests, to maintain the required policies and procedures, and to train its personnel engaged in telemarketing.

What’s interesting is that the current rules require marketers to honor revocation requests within a reasonable timeframe, not exceeding 30 days. Considering these calls were made only 18 and 25 days from Plaintiff’s alleged revocation – the Plaintiff will have to argue that the Defendant’s processing time was unreasonable. It would be remiss of me not to mention, once again, that the new revocation rules come into effect on April 11, 2025, reducing the period to 10 days. Although not yet binding, a judge might find them persuasive.

Plaintiff seeks to represent the following class:

All persons within the United States who, within the four years prior to the filing of this lawsuit through the date of class certification, received two or more marketing calls within any 12-month period, from or on behalf of Defendant, regarding Defendant’s goods, services, or properties, to said person’s residential cellular telephone number, after communicating to Defendant that they did not wish to receive text messages/calls by replying to the messages with a “stop” or similar opt-out instruction.