No debt collector shall use any conduct, the natural consequence of which is to oppress, harass, or abuse any person in connection with the attempt to collect any debt. Such unfair acts include, but are not limited to, the following:
(1) Using profane or obscene language, or language that would ordinarily abuse the typical hearer or reader.
(2) Placing collect telephone calls or sending collect telegrams unless the caller fully identifies himself and the company he represents.
(3) Causing a telephone to ring or engaging any person in telephone conversation with such frequency as to be unreasonable or to constitute a harassment to the person under the circumstances or at times known to be times other than normal waking hours of the person.
(4) Placing telephone calls or attempting to communicate with any person, contrary to his instructions, at his place of employment, unless the debt collector does not have a telephone number where the consumer can be reached during the consumer's nonworking hours. (1977, c. 747, s. 4.)
Notes of Decisions
Green Tree Servicing LLC v. Locklear, 763 S.E.2d 523 (N.C. Ct. App. 2014).
· cites it 4× “Defendants’ Standing According to the North Carolina Debt Collection Act, entities operating as “debt collectors” are prohibited from engaging in certain activities in the course of their work, such as using obscene, profane or abusive language, N.C. Gen. Stat. § 75-52 (1);…”
Hammond (W.D.N.C. 2026).
· cites it 7× “Second, plaintiff alleges that defendant engaged in harassment by causing plaintiff’s telephone to ring and conducting telephonic conversations with plaintiff “with such frequency as to be unreasonable under the circumstances,” in violation of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 75-52 (2). Compl.…”
Duarte v. Truist Bank (W.D.N.C. 2020).
· cites it 2× “§ 227 ; (2) violation of the North Carolina Debt Collection Act (“NCDPA”), N.C. Gen. Stat. § 75-52 ; and (3) invasion of privacy by intrusion upon seclusion.”
Custer v. Dovenmuehle Mortg. Inc (M.D.N.C. 2024).
“…debt collection practices, prohibiting debt collectors from using threats and coercion, § 75-51, harassment, § 75-52, unreasonable publication, § 75-53, deceptive representation, § 75-54, or unconscionable means, § 75-55, to collect a debt. Here, Mr. Custer asserts…”
Custer (M.D.N.C. 2025).
“…debt collection practices. It prohibits debt collectors from using threats and coercion, § 75-51, harassment, § 75-52, unreasonable publication, § 75-53, deceptive representation, § 75-54, or unconscionable means, § 75-55, to collect a debt. See Ross v. F.D.I.C., 625…”
— N.C. Gen. Stat. § 75-52(3) — 1 case
— N.C. Gen. Stat. § 75-52(4) — 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.