People on the National Do Not Call Registry who received telemarketing texts or calls from United Debt Settlement, LLC may be covered by a proposed class action alleging the New York debt relief company contacted them without consent, kept going after stop requests and hid its name on caller ID. No class has been certified and there is nothing to file yet.
Allegations Only · No Settlement Yet
This article describes a class action complaint. The statements below are unproven allegations. United Debt Settlement, LLC denies them, has not been found liable, there is no certified class, and nothing to claim at this time. This page is informational and is not legal advice.
What Is the United Debt Settlement Lawsuit About?
Bronstin v. United Debt Settlement, LLC, No. 1:26-cv-06697, is a proposed class action filed August 5, 2026 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. It alleges that United Debt Settlement, a Manhattan-based debt relief company, sent marketing texts and made calls to personal phone numbers listed on the National Do Not Call Registry, kept contacting the plaintiff after he asked it to stop, and used caller ID that showed place names instead of the company’s name.On October 26, 2026, United Debt Settlement filed its answer. It denies violating the TCPA, denies that the plaintiff or anyone else is owed any relief, and asks the court to dismiss the case and refuse to certify a class. Perrong Law LLC represents the plaintiff. The case is assigned to Judge Arun Subramanian.
Free settlement alerts
Get notified when new class actions open to claims
Join thousands of readers who get the latest class action settlements you may qualify for — delivered straight to your inbox.
What the Complaint Alleges
According to the complaint, the plaintiff’s two phone numbers are personal lines that had been on the National Do Not Call Registry for more than 30 days before any of the messages arrived, and he never did business with United Debt Settlement or gave it his number. The first text came on December 15, 2022, and the complaint says it advertised the company’s loan business. At least 14 more texts followed to the same number.The complaint says the plaintiff replied STOP on March 14, 2023 and received an automated acknowledgment, but the contacts then moved to his second number. It lists four voice calls with voicemails on July 17 and 18, 2023, seven texts on August 16, 2023, five more calls with voicemails between September 21 and November 7, 2023, and a final text at 7:50 a.m. on July 17, 2024. He repeated his stop requests several times in 2023 and 2024, according to the complaint, and the later messages promoted the company’s debt relief services.
The complaint also lists 18 numbers the messages came from, spread across several phone carriers. It says caller name information was available on each line, but displayed a town or region, such as a New York or California place name, rather than United Debt Settlement’s name.
The Three Proposed Classes
The complaint asks to represent three nationwide classes, each reaching back four years before the August 5, 2026 filing date:• National Do Not Call class: people whose numbers were on the Registry for at least 31 days and who received more than one telemarketing call or text from or on behalf of United Debt Settlement within 12 months.
• Telemarketing caller ID class: people who received two or more telemarketing calls or texts within 12 months that did not transmit the company’s or telemarketer’s name, did not transmit a valid number, or transmitted a number that could not be used to make a do-not-call request during business hours.
• Internal Do Not Call class: people who were not customers and received more than one telemarketing call after asking for the calls to stop or saying the company had the wrong number.
The complaint seeks up to $500 per violation, up to $1,500 per violation if the court finds the conduct was willful or knowing, and an injunction against future calls to Registry numbers, to people who asked to stop, and without the required caller ID. No court has certified any of these classes.
How United Debt Settlement Has Responded
United Debt Settlement’s answer denies the core allegations and raises 23 defenses. Among them, it argues that text messages are not telephone calls or telephone solicitations under the TCPA’s Do Not Call provision, and that no private lawsuit can enforce the caller ID rule the second class relies on. It denies that all of the listed numbers are associated with it and says any messages it did not send were sent by third parties acting outside any authority from the company.The answer also contends that the plaintiff’s numbers were not residential lines and, on information and belief, that he used them for business and sought help with business debt, which would bear on whether the messages were telemarketing to a residential subscriber at all. It raises consent, the established business relationship exemption and the Do Not Call safe harbor, and it argues the plaintiff is not a typical or adequate class representative. United Debt Settlement says it may move to compel arbitration for anyone who agreed to arbitrate.
What Happens Next
Judge Subramanian has set an initial pretrial conference for November 12, 2026. With the answer filed, the case moves toward discovery, where the parties would exchange call and text records, and later toward a possible motion for class certification. The company’s arbitration defense could also be raised before then.There is nothing to file in the United Debt Settlement case now. If the case settles on a class basis, people in the settlement class would normally receive a notice explaining how to file a claim. Other TCPA suits raising similar Do Not Call and caller ID theories include the Alexander Shunnarah telemarketing calls lawsuit and the Groupon text message lawsuit.
Questions
Is there a United Debt Settlement class action settlement?
No. Bronstin v. United Debt Settlement, LLC is a proposed class action at the pleading stage in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. No class has been certified, there is no settlement and there is nothing to claim.
How has United Debt Settlement responded to the lawsuit?
United Debt Settlement filed an answer on October 26, 2026 denying that it violated the TCPA. It argues that the Do Not Call provision does not cover text messages, that no private lawsuit can enforce the caller ID rule, that the plaintiff’s numbers were not residential lines, and that some messages were sent by third parties it is not responsible for. It also reserves a right to compel arbitration.
Who would the United Debt Settlement classes cover?
The complaint proposes three nationwide classes covering the four years before August 5, 2026: people on the National Do Not Call Registry who got more than one telemarketing call or text from or for United Debt Settlement in 12 months; people who got two or more such calls or texts without proper caller ID; and non-customers who got more than one telemarketing call after asking the company to stop. A court has not certified any of them.
What damages does the TCPA allow for Do Not Call violations?
The TCPA’s private right of action for Do Not Call violations provides for up to $500 per violation, and a court may increase that to up to $1,500 if it finds the violation was willful or knowing. The Bronstin complaint seeks those amounts plus an injunction. Whether any damages are owed is for the court to decide.
What is the next step in the United Debt Settlement case?
Judge Arun Subramanian has scheduled an initial pretrial conference for November 12, 2026. A schedule for discovery and any class certification motion would normally be set around that conference.
Sources
• Complaint, Bronstin v. United Debt Settlement, LLC, No. 1:26-cv-06697 (S.D.N.Y., filed August 5, 2026): complaint.• Answer and affirmative defenses of United Debt Settlement, LLC (filed October 26, 2026): answer.
• CourtListener docket, including the August 6, 2026 notice of initial pretrial conference.
