A debt relief company answers to two sets of federal rules on most sales calls. The TCPA and the FCC’s rules govern who may be called or texted and with what consent. The FTC’s Telemarketing Sales Rule adds Do Not Call duties of its own, a ban on collecting fees before results, and fewer exemptions for inbound calls. Debt settlement and student-loan relief companies face private TCPA suits and FTC or state enforcement under the TSR, and the records that answer one claim usually answer the other.
Which rules apply to a debt relief company’s calls?
Usually both the TCPA and the Telemarketing Sales Rule, plus any state telemarketing law.
The TCPA, at 47 U.S.C. § 227, and the FCC’s rules at 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200 cover consent for prerecorded and AI-voice calls and the Do Not Call and opt-out rules. Private plaintiffs sue under the TCPA, often as class actions.
The Telemarketing Sales Rule, at 16 C.F.R. Part 310, is enforced mainly by the FTC and state attorneys general. It defines a debt relief service as “any program or service represented, directly or by implication, to renegotiate, settle, or in any way alter the terms of payment or other terms of the debt between a person and one or more unsecured creditors or debt collectors.” Student-loan relief offers can fit that definition, depending on how they’re described.
Why do inbound calls still count for debt relief?
Because the TSR’s exemption for calls responding to ads doesn’t cover debt relief.
Most businesses can rely on a TSR exemption for calls a customer places in response to an advertisement. Section 310.6(b)(5)(i) carves debt relief out of it: the exemption “does not apply to” calls responding to ads “relating to investment opportunities, debt relief services, technical support services,” and certain other offers. A debt relief company running TV, radio, or online ads that drive inbound calls is still conducting telemarketing under the TSR when its campaign involves more than one interstate call, so its disclosures and fee practices on those calls are covered.
Companies that moved to inbound-only sales sometimes assume those calls are outside the telemarketing rules. For debt relief, the exemption doesn’t apply, and § 310.6(b)(6)(i) carves debt relief out of the parallel exemption for calls responding to direct mail and email.
When can a debt relief company collect its fee?
When it sells by telemarketing, only after a debt has actually been settled or changed and the customer has made a payment under the new terms.
Section 310.4(a)(5) makes it abusive to request or receive “payment of any fee or consideration for any debt relief service until and unless” the seller has “renegotiated, settled, reduced, or otherwise altered the terms of at least one debt” and the customer “has made at least one payment pursuant to that settlement agreement.” If debts are settled one at a time, the fee for each must be proportional to the whole, or a fixed percentage of the amount saved. The rule also permits asking the customer to set money aside in a separate account, if the account meets the rule’s conditions.
The advance-fee ban isn’t a TCPA rule, but fee practices and calling practices should be audited together, because the same records often answer both.
Does the Do Not Call Registry apply to debt relief calls?
Yes, under both rules, with slightly different exceptions.
The FCC’s rule bars telephone solicitations to a “residential telephone subscriber who has registered his or her telephone number on the national do-not-call registry,” under 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200(c)(2). The TSR bars outbound calls to Registry numbers unless the seller has the person’s signed written agreement, which must include the number, or an established business relationship with a person who hasn’t asked that seller to stop calling. The TSR defines that relationship by a purchase or transaction “within the 540 days immediately preceding the date of a telemarketing call,” or an inquiry or application within 90 days. Those windows are close to the FCC’s 18 months and three months.
Debt relief leads can come from web forms and lead aggregators. A form submitted to a comparison site may not create a relationship with every company that later buys the lead. The rule also excuses a Registry call that results from error if, as part of its routine business practice, the seller has written Do Not Call procedures, trains its staff on them, keeps an internal do-not-call list, and uses a Registry version obtained “no more than 31 days prior to the date any call is made,” under § 64.1200(c)(2)(i). The seller must also keep records documenting that process and must not use the Registry data for any other purpose. That is why the Registry version date belongs in the file. The firm’s post on buying leads and TCPA consent records covers why aggregator consent is a frequent weak point.
What consent does a prerecorded or AI-voice debt relief call need?
Signed written consent that authorizes the seller under the FCC’s rule, or a specific seller under the TSR.
Under the FCC’s rule, a prerecorded or artificial-voice telemarketing call to a cell phone or a residential line needs prior express written consent. The TSR separately requires, for prerecorded sales calls, a written agreement showing “the willingness of the recipient of the call to receive calls that deliver prerecorded messages by or on behalf of a specific seller,” under § 310.4(b)(1)(v). The TSR agreement must also include the number and the person’s signature, it can’t be a condition of purchase, and it must follow a clear and conspicuous disclosure that its purpose is to authorize prerecorded calls. A form listing many marketing partners invites a “specific seller” challenge under the TSR, and an AI-voice sales call should be treated as prerecorded under the TSR to be safe.
Do calling-hour limits apply to debt relief calls?
Yes. Both rules set an 8 a.m. to 9 p.m. window, measured where the person is.
The TSR makes it abusive, without the person’s prior consent, to make outbound calls to a residence “at any time other than between 8:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. local time at the called person’s location,” under § 310.4(c). The FCC’s rule sets the same hours for telephone solicitations under 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200(c)(1). Several states set narrower windows or limit how many times a company may call the same person in a day, and the firm’s post on state mini-TCPA laws covers the main ones.
Debt relief call centers often run evening shifts to reach people after work. That’s where the time-zone problem bites: an 8:30 p.m. Pacific call to a number with a California area code looks fine, but if the person now lives in New York it reaches them at 11:30 p.m. Area codes are a weak proxy for location. A conservative calling window, plus address data from the lead record, is the cheaper fix. The firm’s post on quiet-hours claims covers the defenses when a late call does go out.
Callbacks deserve their own rule. A callback the consumer asked for generally falls outside both hour limits, because the TSR’s limit yields to the person’s prior consent and the FCC’s reaches only telephone solicitations. A dialer that recycles unanswered leads into the next shift without checking local time creates avoidable risk.
| Issue | TCPA and FCC rule | Telemarketing Sales Rule | Records that answer it |
|---|---|---|---|
| Calls to Registry-listed numbers | 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200(c)(2) | 16 C.F.R. § 310.4(b)(1)(iii)(B) | Written agreements, transaction and inquiry dates, scrub logs |
| Prerecorded or AI-voice sales calls | 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200(a)(2), (a)(3) | 16 C.F.R. § 310.4(b)(1)(v) | Signed consent naming the seller |
| Inbound calls from ads | Generally not a TCPA issue | 16 C.F.R. § 310.6(b)(5)(i) exemption excludes debt relief | Call scripts and disclosures |
| Fees | Not a TCPA issue | 16 C.F.R. § 310.4(a)(5) | Settlement agreements and payment history |
TCPA damages are per violation. 47 U.S.C. § 227 allows up to $500 per violation, or the actual loss if greater, for Do Not Call claims, and $500 per violation or the actual loss, whichever is greater, for claims over prerecorded or artificial-voice calls. A court may increase either up to three times the amount if the violation was willful or knowing. A Do Not Call plaintiff must also have received more than one violating call within 12 months, and the statute gives an affirmative defense to a business that “has established and implemented, with due care, reasonable practices and procedures to effectively prevent telephone solicitations in violation of the regulations prescribed under this subsection.”
What to collect when a debt relief calling claim arrives
Debt relief defendants often face a private TCPA suit and regulatory interest at the same time, so the first collection should serve both. For how these suits usually proceed, see the firm’s page on California TCPA defense.
- Hold dialer and SMS logs, call recordings, and the consent and lead records for the claimant’s number.
- Pull opt-out requests and the internal do-not-call list, with dates.
- Export Registry scrub records and the Registry versions used for each campaign.
- Gather lead-vendor and call-center contracts, sales scripts, and any prerecorded or AI-voice audio.
- Consult counsel before answering a demand, calling the claimant, or offering a refund or settlement.
Questions debt relief companies ask about telemarketing claims
Are student-loan relief companies covered by the TSR’s debt relief rules?
Often, but not always. The definition reaches services that claim to alter payment terms with unsecured creditors or debt collectors. Whether a particular student-loan offer fits depends on what it promises, so the marketing language deserves a close read before anyone assumes it’s outside the rule.
Can a consumer sue under the Telemarketing Sales Rule?
The FTC and state attorneys general are the main enforcers. The Telemarketing Act, at 15 U.S.C. § 6104(a), allows a private suit only where the amount in controversy exceeds $50,000 in actual damages for each person, so most private claims arrive under the TCPA instead.
Does the TCPA apply to text messages from debt relief companies?
The FCC’s rules apply Do Not Call and opt-out requirements to texts. Courts disagree about whether a text is a “call” for a private Do Not Call suit, but the California district courts that have ruled since July treated texts as calls, so a debt relief company should assume its texts are covered.
Does hiring an outside call center shift the TCPA risk?
It moves some risk but not all of it. The TCPA reaches calls made on a seller’s behalf, and the TSR applies to sellers that cause telemarketers to violate it. Contracts should require the call center to keep consent and opt-out records, and the seller should audit them.
Defending debt relief calling claims
If your company has been sued over debt relief or student-loan relief calls, the consent records and the scripts used on each call usually decide whether the claim survives. Rosenberger + Kawabata represents businesses defending TCPA lawsuits and class actions through its business litigation practice, including claims involving debt relief telemarketing. Contact Rosenberger + Kawabata online for a confidential consultation, or call (310) 894-6921.
Sources
The TCPA is 47 U.S.C. § 227, and the FCC’s rules are at 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200. The Telemarketing Sales Rule’s definitions, abusive-practice rules, and exemptions are at 16 C.F.R. § 310.2, § 310.4, and § 310.6.
This post is general information about the Telephone Consumer Protection Act and related laws as of November 5, 2026. It is not legal advice, and reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Courts and the FCC change the rules in this area often, and the outcome of any claim depends on its facts. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.