On October 20, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals denied the plaintiff’s motion for rehearing its decision in Reyes v. Lincoln Automotive Financial Services. The court’s denial provided an affirmation of the court’s earlier decision that the TCPA does not permit one party in a bilateral contract to revoke contractual provisions without the consent of both parties to the contract.
The Lawsuit
The lawsuit was filed by Alberto Reyes who leased a car from Lincoln Automotive. As part of the contract, he agreed to receive automated calls should he ever fail to keep up with his payments. When Mr. Reyes failed to make his payments, Lincoln started calling him.
Mr. Reyes argued that he sent Lincoln a letter in which he revoked his consent to receive calls to his cell phone. Lincoln did not comply and continued to call him. Mr. Reyes claimed that Lincoln violated the TCPA by continuing to call him after he had revoked his consent.
In this case, the court was asked to determine whether one party to the contract between Mr. Reyes and Lincoln Automotive Financial Services could revoke consent to receive calls when the consent was given as “bargained-for consideration in a bilateral contract.”
The Court’s Decision
In their June 2017 decision, the court explained that a contract only has legal effect when both parties consent to every provision, including changes. Being that Lincoln did not provided their consent to the new provision proposed by Mr. Reyes, the court held that the TCPA did not permit him to unilaterally revoke the consent he had provided initially in his lease agreement.
The court ruled that“[t]he common law is clear that consent to another’s actions can ‘become irrevocable’ when it is provided in a legally binding agreement.” Following the decision, Mr. Reyes filed a petition for a rehearing with the Second Circuit.
On October 20, 2017, The Second Circuit upheld that decision and denied Reyes’ motion for rehearing.