Case Law Young v. Npas, Inc.

Young v. Npas, Inc.

Document Cited Authorities (30) Cited in (17) Related

David Humphreys, Pro Hac Vice, Luke Wallace, Pro Hac Vice, Humphreys Wallace Humphreys PC, Tulsa, OK, Eric Stephenson, White And Garner LLC, Salt Lake City, UT, for Plaintiff.

Arthur D. Gregg, Pro Hac Vice, Erik O. Solverud, Pro Hac Vice, Scott J. Dickenson, Pro Hac Vice, Megan D. Meadows, Pro Hac Vice, Spencer Fane LLP, ST Louis, MO, Jamie N. Cotter, Pro Hac Vice, Spencer Fane LLP, Denver, CO, Christopher S. Hill, Christian S. Collins, Kirton McConkie, Salt Lake City, UT, for Defendants.

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER

Clark Waddoups, United States District Judge

Introduction

Before the court are (I) Plaintiff Robyn Young's Motion for Summary Judgment against Defendant Medicredit for violations of the FDCPA (ECF No. 32); (II) Ms. Young and Defendant NPAS' Cross Motions regarding whether NPAS violated the FDCPA (ECF Nos. 32 and 91); (III) Defendants' Motion on Actual Damages (ECF No. 88); and (IV) Ms. Young's Motion to Amend the Complaint (ECF No. 75). The court heard oral argument on September 19, 2018. (ECF No. 114.)

For the reasons stated herein, the court GRANTS, in part, Ms. Young's Motion against Medicredit for violations of the FDCPA; GRANTS, in part, Ms. Young's Motion against NPAS for violations of the FDCPA; DENIES Defendants' Motion on actual Damages; and DENIES Ms. Young's Motion to Amend Complaint.

Facts

Plaintiff Robyn Young (Ms. Young) was employed with Granite School District as a teacher for special needs children, including children with severe autism. (ECF No. 100 at 4.) In the Spring of 2013, Ms. Young was attacked at work by one of her students and suffered a concussion. (ECF No. 100 at 4.) In the Spring of 2014, Plaintiff was again attacked at work by a different student. (ECF No. 100 at 4.) As a result of these attacks, Ms. Young suffered from migraine headaches, partial paralysis, sensitivity to light, and blurry vision. (ECF No. 100 at 4.) Ms. Young filed a worker's compensation claim with the State of Utah against Granite School District to recover for her injuries. (ECF No. 100 at 4.)

As part of her treatment for the injuries suffered in 2013 and 2014, Ms. Young sought medical care, on six different dates,1 from St. Mark's Hospital. St. Mark's Hospital is owned by Hospital Corporation of America (HCA). (See ECF No. 99-1 at 10.2 ) HCA also owns an entity named "Parallon." (ECF No. 99-1 at 5.3 ) Parallon, in turn, owns Defendants NPAS, Inc. and Medicredit, Inc. (ECF No. 99-1 at 5.4 ). NPAS, Inc., Medicredit, Inc., and HSS Systems LLC are all Parallon Affiliates. (ECF No. 93-2 at 4.)

According to NPAS, Inc., NPAS conducts "early out" collections "for St. Mark's Hospital." (ECF No. 93-1 at 3.) NPAS claims that "early out" collections involve "attempts to collect unpaid accounts prior to the time that the account is deemed to be [in] default." (Wright Decl., ¶ 3, ECF No. 93-1 at 3.) According to NPAS, Inc., its collection services for St. Mark's Hospital are governed, "in part," by two agreements: (1) an Intercompany Services Agreement (Intercompany Agreement) and (2) an Amended and Restated Master Services Agreement (Master Agreement). (Wright Decl., ¶ 3, ECF No. 93-1 at 3.) The Intercompany Agreement is "between NPAS on the one hand, and HSS Systems, LLC" on the other. (Wright Decl., ¶ 3, ECF No. 93-1 at 3.) The Master Agreement is between Parallon and "non-party Mountain Division, Inc." (Wright Decl., ¶ 3, ECF No. 93-1 at 3.) Ms. Young was not a party to either agreement.

The Intercompany Agreement provides that "HSS desire[d] to contract with NPAS ... to provide ... early-out collection services for its Client-Hospitals ." (ECF No. 93-3 at 2 (emphasis in original).) The Intercompany Agreement further provides that "NPAS ... shall use commercially reasonable efforts to obtain the amounts owed ...." (ECF No. 93-3 at 3–4.) The Intercompany Agreement also provides that "NPAS ... shall maintain its own employees to provide Early-Out Collection Services for HSS." (ECF No. 93-3 at 4.) And the Agreement provides that "NPAS ... possesses experience and expertise in providing early-out collection services for hospital facilities." (ECF No. 93-3 at 2.)

According to NPAS, "[u]nder the [Master Agreement,] St. Mark's Hospital is a facility which receives services from NPAS and HSS." (Wright Decl., ¶ 5, ECF No. 93-1 at 3.) "As part of the services that HSS provides for St. Mark's Hospital, it contracts certain services with NPAS via the [Intercompany Agreement]." (Wright Decl., ¶ 7, ECF No. 93-1 at 4.)

On four of six dates on which Ms. Young received treatment from St. Mark's Hospital, she "signed a ‘Conditions of Admission and Consent for Outpatient Care,’ [Consent for Care Agreement] in connection with medical services received ...." (See ECF No. 98 at 13–14.) On one date, June 3, 2014, Ms. Young's husband signed one of the Consent for Care Agreements. (See ECF No. 98 at 13.) It is unclear from the record whether Ms. Young signed a Consent for Care Agreement on February 23, 2015. (See ECF No. 98 at 13–14.) Each of these Consent for Care Agreements contained the following provision:

I acknowledge that the Providers may utilize the services of a third party Business Associate or affiliated entity as an extended business office ("EBO Servicer") for medical account billing and servicing. During the time that the medical account is being serviced by the EBO Servicer, the account shall not be considered delinquent, past due or in default, and shall not be reported to a credit bureau or subject to collection legal proceedings. When the EBO Servicer's efforts to obtain payment have been exhausted due to a number of factors (for e.g., Patient of Guarantor's failure to pay or make a payment arrangement after insurance adjustments and payments have been credited, and/or the insurer's denial of claim(s) or benefits is received), the EBO Servicer will send a final notice letter which will include the date that the medical account may be returned from the EBO Servicer to the Provider. Upon return to the Provider by the EBO Servicer, the Provider may place the account back with the EBO Servicer, or, at the option of the Provider, may determine the account to be delinquent, past due and in default. Once the medical account is determined to be delinquent it may be subject to late fees, interest as stated, referral to a collection agency for collection as a delinquent account, credit bureau reporting and enforcement by legal proceedings.

(See ECF No. 92-6 at 3–4.)

As a result of the treatment she received from St. Mark's Hospital, six different accounts were placed with NPAS, and four were placed with Medicredit.

NPAS Accounts

Six different accounts were placed with NPAS as shown in the following chart.5

Placement Date     Date of Service     Amount        Account Number
7/22/14            6/3/14              $431.76       4860
2/27/15            5/23/14             $2,539.88     4683
6/11/15            2/23/15             $181.05       1437
12/28/15           11/2/15             $952.84       4604
2/29/16            2/2/16              $847.36       6966
8/2/16             5/29/16             $713.89       1159

NPAS maintained records of these accounts in its Collection Notes. (See ECF No. 32-17 at 1–73.) The court first discusses Account 4683 and then the remaining accounts placed with Medicredit.

Account 4683

On or around October 26, 2015, NPAS sent Ms. Young a letter stating, in part, that "[d]espite [its] efforts," it had "been unable to secure payment on" Account 4683. It also stated: "You are obligated to pay for the services provided." (ECF No. 82-2 at 2.) On or around May 17, 2016, NPAS sent Ms. Young another letter regarding Account 4683 in which it requested that Ms. Young send NPAS her attorney's information. (ECF No. 32-3 at 2.) Ms. Young's attorney, Lester Perry replied on July 5, 2016 with reference to this account, and accounts 6966 and 4604, requesting certain information from NPAS and informing NPAS that there could be other accounts that NPAS was attempting to collect on. (See ECF No. 32-4 at 2.)

Medicredit Accounts

Account 4683 was first placed with Medicredit on October 11, 2014. (Wright Decl., ¶ 21, ECF No. 62-2 at 6; see also ECF No. 32-16 at 2 (Medicredit's Account Notes indicate that the "placement date" of this account was "10/11/2014.").) Four months later, on February 27, 2015, Account 4683 "was placed with NPAS ...." (See ECF No. 98 at 16.) Three additional debts were placed with Medicredit on three different dates for the services that St. Mark's Hospital performed for Ms. Young. (See ECF No. 62 at 15.) All of these debts were assigned different "reference ID" numbers: 4683, 1437, 4604, and 6966. (See ECF No. 101-5 at 2.) Even though the four accounts were each assigned a different reference ID number, Medicredit had a single "consumer ID" that was specifically tied to Ms. Young and all four of her accounts. (See ECF No. 101-5 at 2.)

Medicredit maintained records of these four accounts in its "Medicredit Account Notes" and in its "Noble System" call history log. (Wright Decl., ¶ 20, ECF No. 62-2 at 6.) The Medicredit Account Notes are comprised, at least in part, of "notes from St. Mark's [hospital]" and "notes from NPAS." (See ECF No. 101-2 at 17, Wright Depo. 59: 7–14.) The Medicredit Account Notes also include some entries from the Noble System Call Log.

Medicredit's Account Notes do not clearly delineate between accounts—if it all. (Compare ECF No. 32-16 with ECF No. 32-176 .) In other words, the Medicredit Account Notes appear to be one large, amorphous, omnibus account. In his deposition, Medicredit's 30(b)(6) witness, Mr. Wright, described the Medicredit Account Notes as "a Consumer Fact Sheet out of the system we have at Medicredit." (ECF No. 101-2, Wright Depo. 30: 1–2.) He then stated that "[i]t's called...

5 cases
Document | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Indiana – 2020
Wagoner v. NPAS, Inc.
"...seemed not to have that luxury of terms.One court recently used a different analysis for early-out services. In Young v. NPAS, Inc. , 361 F. Supp.3d 1171, 1194-96 (D. Utah 2019), the district court held NPAS to be a debt collector under the FDCPA, but did so with the "guiding principle" tha..."
Document | U.S. District Court — District of Utah – 2019
Mitchell v. Bank of N.Y. Mellon
"...(See Compl. ¶ 215, ECF No. 2 at 40.) "To establish a violation of the FDCPA, Plaintiff must prove four elements." Young v. NPAS, Inc., 361 F. Supp. 3d 1171, 1183 (D. Utah 2019) (citation omitted). First, that Plaintiff is a "consumer;" second, that "the debt arises out of a transaction ente..."
Document | U.S. District Court — District of Colorado – 2019
Edwards v. BC Servs., Inc.
"...attempts to collect the Subject Debt were not "permitted by law" and thus prohibited by Section 1692f(1). See Young v. NPAS, Inc., 361 F. Supp. 3d 1171, 1188 (D. Utah 2019) (finding that debt collector violated Section 1692f(1) by seeking to collect a debt that was subject to workers' compe..."
Document | U.S. District Court — District of New Jersey – 2022
Garcia v. Commercial Acceptance Co.
"... ... analysis. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. , 477 U.S ... 242, 248 (1986). Rather, “a fact is ... ‘material' under Rule 56 if ... and therefore not owed by consumer plaintiff under Colorado ... law); Young ... and therefore not owed by consumer plaintiff under Colorado ... law); Young v. NPAS ... "
Document | U.S. District Court — District of Maryland – 2020
Evans v. NPAS, Inc.
"...debt as being in default." Mavris v. RSI Enterprises Inc., 86 F. Supp. 3d 1079, 1085 (D. Ariz. 2015); see also Young v. NPAS, Inc., 361 F. Supp. 3d 1171, 1194 (D. Utah 2019). When viewing the record evidence most favorably to Evans, no reasonable trier of fact could conclude that at the tim..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Experience vLex's unparalleled legal AI

Access millions of documents and let Vincent AI power your research, drafting, and document analysis — all in one platform.

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
5 cases
Document | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Indiana – 2020
Wagoner v. NPAS, Inc.
"...seemed not to have that luxury of terms.One court recently used a different analysis for early-out services. In Young v. NPAS, Inc. , 361 F. Supp.3d 1171, 1194-96 (D. Utah 2019), the district court held NPAS to be a debt collector under the FDCPA, but did so with the "guiding principle" tha..."
Document | U.S. District Court — District of Utah – 2019
Mitchell v. Bank of N.Y. Mellon
"...(See Compl. ¶ 215, ECF No. 2 at 40.) "To establish a violation of the FDCPA, Plaintiff must prove four elements." Young v. NPAS, Inc., 361 F. Supp. 3d 1171, 1183 (D. Utah 2019) (citation omitted). First, that Plaintiff is a "consumer;" second, that "the debt arises out of a transaction ente..."
Document | U.S. District Court — District of Colorado – 2019
Edwards v. BC Servs., Inc.
"...attempts to collect the Subject Debt were not "permitted by law" and thus prohibited by Section 1692f(1). See Young v. NPAS, Inc., 361 F. Supp. 3d 1171, 1188 (D. Utah 2019) (finding that debt collector violated Section 1692f(1) by seeking to collect a debt that was subject to workers' compe..."
Document | U.S. District Court — District of New Jersey – 2022
Garcia v. Commercial Acceptance Co.
"... ... analysis. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. , 477 U.S ... 242, 248 (1986). Rather, “a fact is ... ‘material' under Rule 56 if ... and therefore not owed by consumer plaintiff under Colorado ... law); Young ... and therefore not owed by consumer plaintiff under Colorado ... law); Young v. NPAS ... "
Document | U.S. District Court — District of Maryland – 2020
Evans v. NPAS, Inc.
"...debt as being in default." Mavris v. RSI Enterprises Inc., 86 F. Supp. 3d 1079, 1085 (D. Ariz. 2015); see also Young v. NPAS, Inc., 361 F. Supp. 3d 1171, 1194 (D. Utah 2019). When viewing the record evidence most favorably to Evans, no reasonable trier of fact could conclude that at the tim..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex