## Facts

- Borrowers obtained auto loans from CitiFinancial Auto and later defaulted.
- Santander Consumer USA Inc. purchased the defaulted loans and sought to collect the debts for its own account.
- Borrowers filed a putative class action alleging Santander used unlawful collection practices in violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq.
- Santander moved to dismiss, arguing it was not a “debt collector” under the FDCPA because it owned the debts it was collecting.
- The district court dismissed the complaint; the Fourth Circuit affirmed.
- The Supreme Court granted certiorari limited to whether a company collecting defaulted debts it purchased for itself falls within the FDCPA definition covering those who regularly collect debts “owed or due ... another.”

## Issues

1. Whether an entity that regularly seeks to collect debts it purchased after default qualifies as a “debt collector” under the FDCPA provision covering those who collect debts “owed or due ... another.”

## Decision

- The Supreme Court unanimously affirmed the Fourth Circuit.
- A company collecting debts it owns for its own account is not a “debt collector” under the FDCPA language covering those who regularly collect debts “owed or due ... another,” even if the debts were in default when purchased.
- The Court declined to address whether such a company could qualify as a “debt collector” under other statutory prongs not presented.

## Legal Principles

- Under 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(6), the phrase “debts owed or due ... another” is best read to refer to debts presently owed to a different person, not debts that were once owed to someone else.
- Ownership status matters for this clause: a debt owner collecting for itself acts as a creditor, not a third-party collector, for purposes of the “owed ... another” definition.
- Consistent-usage canon: identical words within the same statute are generally presumed to have the same meaning across provisions absent strong contrary indications.
- Policy concerns about abusive practices by defaulted-debt purchasers cannot override clear statutory text; any expansion of coverage is for Congress.

## Conclusion

The Court held that the FDCPA’s definition of “debt collector,” as to those who regularly collect debts “owed or due ... another,” does not cover a company that purchases defaulted debts and then collects them for its own account, leaving other definitional routes for FDCPA coverage unresolved.


Henson v. Santander Consumer USA Inc., 582 U.S. 79 (2017)