You ever watch that old movie where King Kong fought that dragon creature, or dinosaur, or whatever it was?

Well, here’s the TCPA equivalent for you.

Far be it from me to ever glorify the exploits of Craig Cunningham. This guy is one of the most notorious repeat players in the game and he has apparently deployed dubious means to set up lawsuits, at least in my opinion.

Then again “Rachel from Card Services” is pretty famous in her own right. As the FTC once quipped, “we’ve got your number, honey.”  Indeed, in a blog post as free-wheelin as the stuff you read on TCPAWorld, the “other” Commission has a little coffee chat with Rachel: “Let’s cut to the chase, Girlfriend.  You’re one annoying you-know-what.”

At the time—the post is from 2012—the FTC identified “Treasure Your Success, Ambrosia Web Design, A+ Financial Center, The Green Savers, and Key One Solutions” as the “bad guys”  allegedly “pitching deceptive credit card interest rate reduction schemes” through the RfCS robo campaign.

But that was 2012. And despite the FTC’s fun blog post Rachel’s antics kept making headlines as late as 2019.

Well leave it to Craig Cunningham to—allegedly—trace the Rachel from Card Services “scam” back to its Florida roots and unmask the individuals actually (allegedly) responsible for the calls to begin with.

In a new suit filed Tuesday in Texas, Cunningham sues Florida-residents James Young, Andrew Russo, and Melanie Gallagher as the individuals ultimately behind Rachel’s antics. According to the complaint—found here Cunningham complaint—these individuals ran companies who were part of something called “American Credit Network,” an “unregistered DBA” that was apparently behind hundreds of “Rachel from Card Services” that allegedly bombarded Cunningham’s phone.

And so now Craig Kong will apparently do battle with Rachelsaurus Rex in a Texas courthouse, and I’m bringing the popcorn.

Interestingly, Cunningham pleads that the Defendants would not let him sign up for their credit-solution services—repeatedly characterized as a “scam” in the lawsuit—because he was a repeat litigator. But they apparently had no problem blasting his cell phone with unwanted RfCS Robocalls.

The Complaint, which is pleaded as an individual suit, seeks a permanent injunction and over $300,000.00 in damages.

None of the defendants have counsel yet and I didn’t try to reach out to the Defendants for their side of things—which is likely quite different than what Cunningham alleges. (If anyone from ACN wants to tell their side of the story I’m always happy to chat.)