The 2nd Civil Court of Paranaíba ordered a credit recovery company to pay R$15,000 in damages for collecting a debt from the plaintiff after an agreement had been reached between the parties. In his decision, Judge Plácido de Souza Neto also ordered the company to declare the debts listed in the lawsuit non-existent.
The consumer had an original debt with the defendant, in the amount of R$607.21, since January 7, 2015, and for this reason he was entered in the bad debt register on May 22, 2019, but in July 2019 he made an agreement to settle the debt in full and, to this end, he paid the amount of R$350,00. In response to the settlement, the defendant undertook to remove the plaintiff's name from the SCPC/SERASA within a maximum of 5 working days, which was not done. He also reported that he was surprised to find that his name had been rejected when he made purchases in local shops. He therefore requested that the defendant be ordered to cancel the protests it had made in his name, as well as compensation for moral and material damages.
The defendant was duly summoned and filed a defense, in which it claimed that it had become a creditor of the plaintiff due to an assignment of credit, and that there had been no unlawful act on its part. It also argued that the registration was legitimate, since there had been default.
When analyzing the case file, Judge Plácido de Souza Neto found that the plaintiff entered into an agreement with the defendant, making payment on July 25, 2019, i.e. "it is clear that the maintenance of the registration lasted when the debt had already been paid, and was therefore undue." The magistrate also explained that, since this is a consumer relationship, the service provider's liability is objective, only excluded if the exclusive fault of the consumer or a third party is proven, which was not the case here.
"Thus, in view of all the information presented so far, it is clear that the defendant must make good the damage suffered by the plaintiff, who must receive pecuniary compensation for the moral damage resulting from the undue maintenance of her name on default registers," concluded the judge.
ATTENTION: THIS POST WAS TAKEN FROM THE WEBSITE OF THE ASSOCIATION OF LAWYERS OF SÃO PAULO
Comments