Firm Overview

Mel S. Harris and Associates, LLC (“MSH”), is a New York law firm with a primary practice of consumer debt collection, dedicated to providing comprehensive collection services to our clients. We are recognized as the preeminent consumer collection law firm in New York, and represent a range of clients, from global financial institutions to small business owners, in every market sector, including but not limited to financial, education, health care, telecommunications, and technology.

This firm is known industry-wide for our unsurpassed collection specialties advanced by our proprietary computer technologies and in-house software programming and design, but we also pride ourselves on our commitment to treating consumers with integrity and respect, as we attempt to find workable solutions.

In addition to our collection services, MSH has wide-ranging and specialized experience in the defense of Creditors, Collection Agencies, and Law Firms, in individual and class actions brought under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, Fair Credit Reporting Act, Truth in Lending Act, all related consumer torts, associated state consumer protection laws, and administrative/regulatory actions. As well, this firm specializes in structuring contracts for the sale and purchase of receivables, and our attorneys are recognized as industry leaders in the area of creditors’ rights compliance counseling.

Our long standing success is due to our dedicated staff of experienced attorneys, collection professionals, finance specialists, judgment enforcement experts, verification staff, skip tracing personnel, support staff, and our first class IT staff and full-time in-house Computer Programmers. This strong and dedicated team enables MSH to draw upon a broad and varied range of resources with concentrated and comprehensive understanding of specific legal issues faced by each given specialized industry. With this highly skilled team in place, MSH provides highly competent and cost-effective legal solutions designed to fit our respective clients’ needs.

Latest News

  • 03.18.13
    This paper is part of the National List’s “50 White Papers in 50 Days” and is a valuable reference source to creditors, agencies and law firms.... more
  • 01.28.13
    Court held that wrong number debt collection calls are not covered by the TCPA... more
  • 01.23.13
    No violation found under the FDCPA by sending a letter to a debtor who had filed bankruptcy... more
  • 01.22.13
    For an action seeking damages under the Judiciary Law §487, court finds that there is no merit to plaintiff's argument that the statute of limitations does not begin to run until the conclusion of the underlying case... more
  • 12.28.12
    9th Circuit issued an opinion that pursuant to the FCC ruling, prior express consent is consent to call a particular telephone number in connection with a particular debt that is given before the call in question is placed... more
  • 12.19.12
    Court grants motion for summary judgment in favor of defendant and expresses serious concern that this lawsuit reflects an attempt by plaintiff and/or his attorney to manipulate the law for an improper purpose... more
  • 12.14.12
    In an action relating to the efficacy of a release against a 3rd party, court found that in signing a release, Plaintiff cannot be relieved of that choice simply because of an incorrect assessment of consequences... more
  • 08.17.12
    2nd Circuit holds that plaintiff had a due process right to notice and the opportunity to opt out under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23... more
  • 06.01.12
    Plaintiff is prohibited from pleading the same conduct as the basis for other FDCPA violations as the basis for a 15 U.S.C. 1692f claim... more
  • 05.11.12
    Collector’s wish for expedited payment and statement of client’s right to pursue legal action does not overshadow 15 U.S.C. 1692g... more
  • 04.30.12
    Second Circuit upholds decision denying certification, finding that common issues did not predominate over individual ones... more
  • 10.26.11
    Rooker-Feldman doctrine does not nullify the enforceability and validity of an arbitration agreement... more
  • 10.20.11
    FDCPA does not require validation of debt prior to initial contact with consumer... more
  • 09.29.11
    Debt Collector's Calls to Non-Debtor Not Barred by TCPA... more
  • 08.10.11
    Court denies class certification on adequacy grounds... more
  • 07.07.11
    Defendant's letter stating that plaintiff's student loan debt was "ineligible for bankruptcy discharge" was not false, deceptive, or misleading... more
  • 06.20.11
    Supreme Court of the United States denies class certification due to lack of commonality... more
  • 06.06.11
    Court rejects “continuing violations” rule that would reset the statute with each separate communication... more
  • 04.26.11
    Court finds deficiencies in plaintiff’s attorney billing records... more
  • 04.06.11
    Offering to discount a debt is in no way a deceptive or unconscionable debt collection practice... more
  • 04.01.11
    § 1681b(a)(3)(A) of the FCRA upheld by 3rd Circuit... more
  • 03.23.11
    Not leaving a message does not rise to the level of deception or false representation... more
  • 02.23.11
    TCPA claim is implausible on its face... more
  • 02.17.11
    No private right of action for violation of bankruptcy discharge... more
  • 02.11.11
    Lawyer does not stand in shoes of consumer... more
  • 01.13.11
    Court denies certification of FDCPA and TCPA class... more
  • 01.03.11
    High frequency of phone calls does not in it of itself rise to the level of harassment under the FDCPA.more