TCPA LITIGATOR SUED FOR FRAUD!: Court Allows Fraud Claim to Proceed Against Consumer Who Applied for Health Coverage After Receiving allegedly Unwanted Calls

Add a comment

TCPA litigators will often trick and deceive callers in an effort to determine who is placing the calls and set up a TCPA lawsuit.

Well one medicare provider recently countersued a Plaintiff who allegedly set up a TCPA suit and the court is allowing a fraud claim to proceed against her.

In Keneisha Smith v. GetMeHealthCare, LLC 2026 WL 2089044 (M.D. Fl. July 21, 2026) the plaintiff alleged receipt of unwanted calls. In order to find out who sent her the messages she stayed on the line and was connected to GetMeHealthCare, LLC and then lied about her age to apply for coverage she did not qualify for.

Smith sued the Defendant for the unwanted calls. But the Defendant sued back arguing her participation on the call and the lie about the age constituted fraud.

Smith moved to dismiss the fraud claim arguing the claim was not viable under the circumstances of the case but the court disagreed:

GMHC alleges all of the relevant details regarding the alleged fraud, such as Smith’s conduct before the call (her consent to be contacted), when the call took place (June 12, 2025), how long the call was in total (7 minutes and 2 seconds), what misrepresentations Smith made during the call (that she consented to be contacted and her age), as well as how GMHC relied on the misrepresentations (by accepting the call from the thirdparty agent after Smith provided her consent to them and completing her enrollment). (Doc. 19 ¶¶ 8–15); (see also Doc. 29-2 at 2–4). GMHC alleges that Smith’s motivation to commit fraud was to predicate a lawsuit against GMHC to get money. (Doc. 19 ¶ 10). While Smith may disagree with that allegation, the Court must accept it as true at the pleading stage. See Belanger v. Salvation Army, 556 F.3d 1153, 1155 (11th Cir. 2009) (citation omitted). The recording and transcript of the June 12, 2025 call support most, if not all, of GMHC’s allegations. (Doc. 29-2). GMHC provided “the who, what, when, where, and how of the fraud alleged.

Simple.

Now a key fact here is the allegation tha t Plaintiff consented to the call in the first place– which is the way these cases usually crop up since TCPA defendants rarely make outbound calls without consent.

So if you find yourself in a TCPA lawsuit arising out of a first-party (r even third-party) data lead definitely keep a counterclaim for fraud in mind–especially if the consumer stays on the line to talk to your agents afterward!

Troutman Amin, LLP has been filing counterclaims like these on behalf of TCPA defendants for years– so this is nothing new for us. But it is always great to see a court side with the defendant in one of these!

Give us a call if you have questions– or talk to the Baroness at ASE about it!

Chat soon.

Discover more from TCPAWorld

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Categories:

Published by Eric "Czar" Troutman

The Czar of TCPAWorld Eric Troutman is one of the country’s prominent class action defense lawyers and is nationally recognized in Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) litigation and compliance. He has served as lead defense counsel in more than 70 national TCPA class actions and has litigated nearly a thousand individual TCPA cases in his role as national strategic litigation counsel for major banks and finance companies. He also helps industry participants build TCPA-compliant processes, policies, and systems. Eric has built a national litigation practice based upon deep experience, rigorous analysis and extraordinary responsiveness. Eric and his team feel equally at home litigating multibillion dollar telecommunications class actions in federal court as they do developing and executing national litigation strategies for institutions facing an onslaught of individual TCPA matters. They thrive in each of these roles – delivering consistently excellent results – while never losing sight of the client experience. While many firms now tout TCPA expertise, Eric has been there from the beginning. He built one of the country’s first TCPA-only defense teams and began serving as national TCPA counsel for his clients nearly a decade ago. This perspective allows him to swiftly develop the right litigation strategies for dealing with recurring problems, without wasting time on tactics that are bound to fail. Eric’s rich historical perspective and encyclopedic knowledge of the TCPA landscape also make him an invaluable resource to institutional compliance teams struggling to comply with the shifting regulatory landscape. No task is too small – or too big. Indeed, Eric and his team have helped build TCPA-compliant systems and processes for some of the largest and most complex corporate entities in the country. He commonly works with in-house compliance counsel to build and implement enterprise and business-line specific TCPA solutions, performs TCPA audits and drafts and reviews proposed TCPA policies and procedures. He and his team also have the technical expertise necessary to assist call centers seeking to develop TCPA-resistant call path architecture or to modify existing telephony and software integration to better insulate from potential TCPA exposure. Eric has built a reputation for thought leadership. An avid blogger and speaker, he has been at the forefront of the industry’s effort to push for clarity and a return to sanity for the TCPA for years. He was selected to advocate for the financial services industry on important TCPA issues before the Federal Communications Commission and co-authored the nation’s only comprehensive practice guide on TCPA defense. In his spare time, Eric leads defense teams representing banks and other financial services companies in consumer finance litigation matters. He has experience representing clients in UCC, TILA, RESPA FCRA, CCRA, CLRA, FDCPA, RFDCPA and FCCPA claims, as well as in fraud and bank operations issues.

Leave a Reply