State law lookup › Debt collectors › Minnesota

Debt collectors in Minnesota: what the law says

A debt collector is harassing me

State law

What the statute says

Small claims limit: Minnesota's small claims forum is called conciliation court. Minn. Stat. 491A.01, subd. 3a(a): the court "has jurisdiction to hear, conciliate, try, and determine civil claims if the amount of money or property that is the subject matter of the claim does not exceed: (1) $20,000; or (2) $4,000, if the claim involves a…
Read the full rule
consumer credit transaction." IMPORTANT and frequently misread: the $4,000 consumer-credit cap only applies when all four elements of subdivision 3a(b) are met, including "(3) the claimant is the seller or lender in the transaction." When the CONSUMER is the one suing - which is the demand-letter scenario - the claimant is not the seller or lender, so the $20,000 limit governs, not $4,000. Conciliation court cannot issue a writ of execution or a garnishment summons (subd. 2).
Bond: Minn. Stat. 332.34 requires each licensee to file and maintain "a corporate surety bond ... in a sum of at least $50,000 plus an additional $5,000 for each $100,000 received by the collection agency from debtors located in Minnesota during the previous calendar year, less commissions earned." The statute caps it: "The total amount of the bond shall not exceed $100,000." Do not promise a consumer recovery from this bond - the statute does not identify debtors as claimants against it, and Minn.
Read the full rule
Stat. 332.43, subd. 1 gives receivership expenses "the first claim on the bond."
Headline: Minnesota gives medical-debt consumers a private damages remedy and gives everyone else a detailed conduct code without one - but the two regimes overlap rather than split. For MEDICAL debt, Minn. Stat. ch.
Read the full rule
332C (effective October 1, 2024; the fee-shifting section 332C.04 is effective that date only "for causes of action commenced on or after that date") lets a debtor sue the collecting party directly for actual damages, additional damages as the court may allow up to $1,000 per violation as enacted, costs and a reasonable attorney fee, with the first two trebled for willful and malicious violations. Two limits travel with that remedy and must never be separated from it. First, "medical debt" means debt incurred primarily for MEDICALLY NECESSARY health treatment or services, and Minn. Stat. 332C.01, subd. 4(b) expressly excludes dental services, veterinary services, debt charged to a home equity line of credit, and general-purpose credit cards - so a dental or veterinary collection gets none of this. Second, liability is strict as to intent but not absolute: Minn. Stat. 332C.05(g) is a complete affirmative defense if the collecting party proves by a preponderance of the evidence that the violation was an unintentional bona fide error made despite reasonable avoidance procedures, or resulted from inaccurate or incorrect information supplied by a health care provider, a health carrier, or another collecting party. Also, the $1,000 cap is CPI-indexed and first adjusted on July 1, 2026, so it should not be printed as a fixed current number. For every OTHER kind of debt, Minnesota's Collection Agencies Act (Minn. Stat. 332.31 to 332.44) writes a 24-item code of conduct at 332.37 but contains NO EXPRESS private right of action; its express enforcement routes are the Commissioner of Commerce and injunctions brought by the Attorney General or a county attorney. The consumer's reliable damages remedy for non-medical debt is the federal FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. 1692k, not chapter 332 - and the FDCPA reaches third-party collectors and debt buyers, not an original creditor collecting its own debt in its own name, so against an original creditor there is no Minnesota or federal debt-collection damages claim at all (see fdcpa_fallback). The two chapters overlap rather than partition: Minn. Stat. 332C.03(d) applies the medical-debt credit-reporting ban to collection agencies and debt buyers licensed under chapter 332, so a licensed agency collecting medical debt is bound by both chapters at once, while chapter 332C also reaches a hospital or clinic collecting in its own name, which chapter 332 does not.
Fdcpa fallback: For non-medical debt, the consumer's reliable private remedy is federal, not state, and the two must be kept clearly labeled in a letter. 15 U.S.C.
Read the full rule
1692k(a) gives the consumer actual damages, "such additional damages as the court may allow, but not exceeding $1,000," and, on a successful action, costs and a reasonable attorney fee. The federal deadline is short: an FDCPA action must be brought "within one year from the date on which the violation occurs." Minn. Stat. 332.37(a)(12) separately makes an FDCPA violation a Minnesota violation, but be precise about what that adds and what it does not: 332.37(a)(12) is a state REGULATORY hook that supports a Department of Commerce complaint and license consequences against a chapter 332 licensee; it does not convert a chapter 332 violation into a damages claim, and the 1692k remedy runs from the FDCPA itself, not through 332.37(a)(12). Note also that the FDCPA generally reaches third-party debt collectors rather than an original creditor collecting its own debt in its own name. A Minnesota letter about non-medical debt should therefore lead with the FDCPA for damages and treat Minn. Stat. 332.37 as the regulatory complaint hook.
Licensing penalty: Operating unlicensed is a crime, not merely a regulatory matter. Minn. Stat. 332.33, subd. 2: "A person who carries on business as a collection agency or debt buyer without first having obtained a license or acts as a collector without first having registered with the commissioner pursuant to sections 332.31 to 332.44,…
Read the full rule
or who carries on this business after the revocation, suspension, or expiration of a license or registration is guilty of a misdemeanor." This is a criminal referral point, not something the consumer can convert into damages.
Enforcement agency: Two agencies. Licensing and discipline of collection agencies, debt buyers, and collectors sits with the Minnesota Department of Commerce (Minn. Stat. 45.011, subd. 4; 332.33; 332.40). Consumer complaints and chapter 332C medical debt enforcement sit with the Office of the Minnesota Attorney General (Minn. Stat.
Read the full rule
332C.05(a); 332.39). The Attorney General's Consumer Assistance Request Form is at https://www.ag.state.mn.us/office/complaint.asp; the office address shown there is 445 Minnesota Street, Suite 600, St. Paul, MN 55101, phone (651) 296-3353. Note that Minn. Stat. 332C.02(18) requires medical debt collectors to print the Attorney General's general telephone number on their first mailing.
Penalty injunctive: Minn. Stat. 332.39: "The attorney general or the county attorney of any county may apply for an injunction in district court to enjoin any violations of sections 332.31 to 332.44, or any practices prohibited in section 332.37, and any such court may issue temporary or permanent injunctions as the circumstances shall…
Read the full rule
require." Note the standing limit - this remedy is available to the Attorney General or a county attorney, not to a private consumer.
Penalty regulatory: Because chapter 332 is entrusted to the Commissioner of Commerce (Minn. Stat. 45.011, subd. 4 lists "chapters 45 to 80C, 80E to 83, 155A, 216C, 332, 332A, 332B, 345, and 359"), the general Commerce penalty applies. Minn. Stat. 45.027, subd.
Read the full rule
6: "The commissioner may impose a civil penalty not to exceed $10,000 per violation upon a person who violates any law, rule, or order related to the duties and responsibilities entrusted to the commissioner unless a different penalty is specified." The Commissioner may also revoke or suspend the license or registration after notice and hearing under Minn. Stat. 332.40, subd. 1. This money goes to the state, not to the consumer - do not tell a consumer they will receive it.
Prohibited conduct: Minn. Stat. 332.37(a) lists 24 prohibited practices. Under Minn. Stat. 332.37(a) they bind collection agencies, debt buyers, and collectors. Two limits on WHO is bound: (i) since August 1, 2026, Minn. Stat.
Read the full rule
332.32(c) excludes a chapter 58 residential mortgage servicer or chapter 58B student loan servicer acting within its licensed activity from the definition of "collection agency," so such a servicer is outside 332.37 entirely (see licensing_scope_limit); (ii) one clause-level carve-out is stated in Minn. Stat. 332.37(b): "Paragraph (a), clauses (6), (8), (10), (17), and (21), do not apply to debt buyers except to the extent the debt buyer engages in third-party debt collection for others." None of the clauses recommended for letters below fall inside that carve-out. The most useful clauses, quoted from the statute: clause (23) requires that "when initially contacting a Minnesota debtor by mail," the collector include a disclosure "in a type size or font which is equal to or larger than the largest other type of type size or font used in the text of the notice" stating "This collection agency is licensed by the Minnesota Department of Commerce" or "This debt buyer is licensed by the Minnesota Department of Commerce" as applicable. Clause (16) forbids, "when attempting to collect a debt," failing "to provide the debtor with the full name of the collection agency or debt buyer as it appears on its license or as listed on any 'doing business as' or 'd/b/a' registered with the Department of Commerce" - note the second half: a properly registered d/b/a is permitted, so the correct demand is that the collector identify which licensed name or which Commerce-registered d/b/a it is using, NOT an accusation that only the name on the license may be used. Clause (20) forbids attempting "to collect any amount, including any interest, fee, charge, or expense incidental to the charge-off obligation, from a debtor unless the amount is expressly authorized by the agreement creating the debt or is otherwise permitted by law" (see the defeasibility flag - the contract can authorize the charge). Clause (24) forbids commencing "legal action to collect a debt outside the limitations period set forth in section 541.053." Clause (12) makes it a Minnesota violation to "violate any of the provisions of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act of 1977, Public Law 95-109, while attempting to collect on any account, bill or other indebtedness." Clause (13) forbids communicating with a debtor "by use of a recorded message utilizing an automatic dialing announcing device after the debtor expressly informs the agency or collector to cease" that form of contact. Clause (15) forbids enlisting a neighbor or third party to ask the debtor to make contact when the debtor has a listed telephone number, but it expressly permits a person who resides with the debtor, a third party the debtor authorized, and a call-back message at the debtor's place of employment limited to the collector's name and telephone number. Clause (19) forbids accepting "currency or coin as payment for a debt without issuing an original receipt to the debtor and maintaining a duplicate receipt in the debtor's payment records." Clause (14) forbids implying or suggesting "that health care services will be withheld in an emergency situation." Clause (5) forbids simulating lawyer stationery, lawyer-only forms, or judicial process. Clause (9) forbids operating under a name or in a manner implying government affiliation. REMEDY LIMIT that must accompany any of these: a violation of 332.37 is not itself a consumer damages claim - see private_right_of_action.
Licensing requirement: A collection agency or debt buyer generally must hold a Minnesota collection agency license before doing business in the state, and a person acting as a collector must separately register with the Commissioner of Commerce. Minn. Stat. 332.33, subd.
Read the full rule
1: "Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, no person shall conduct business in Minnesota as a collection agency or debt buyer, as defined in sections 332.31 to 332.44, without having first applied for and obtained a collection agency license. A person acting under the authority of a collection agency, debt buyer, or as a collector must first register with the commissioner under this section." The opening qualifier "Except as otherwise provided in this chapter" is part of the rule, and the exclusions in Minn. Stat. 332.32 are where it bites. The same subdivision permits a registered collector to use "one additional assumed name only if the assumed name is registered with and approved by the commissioner".
DEBT BUYERS ARE COVERED, AND THE DEFINITION IS WIDE. Minn. Stat. 332.31, subd. 8 defines "Debt buyer" as "a business engaged in the purchase of any charged-off account, bill, or other indebtedness for collection purposes, whether the business collects the account, bill, or other indebtedness, hires a third party for collection, or hires an attorney for litigation related to the collection." Outsourcing collection to an agency, or handing the file to a law firm to sue, does not take a purchaser outside the definition. That definition and the extension of the licensing duty to debt buyers were both enacted by 2021 Minn. Laws 1st Spec. Sess. ch. 4, art. 5 (Collection Agencies and Debt Buyers), secs. 3 and 7, each of which reads "This section is effective August 1, 2021."
THE JANUARY 1, 2022 DATE IS A FILING DEADLINE WITH AN EXPRESS EXCEPTION ATTACHED. Minn. Stat. 332.33, subd. 1 states both rules in the same breath: "A business that operates as a debt buyer must submit a completed license application no later than January 1, 2022. A debt buyer who has filed an application with the commissioner for a collection agency license prior to January 1, 2022, and whose application remains pending with the commissioner thereafter, may continue to operate without a license until the commissioner approves or denies the application." Being unlicensed after January 1, 2022 is therefore not by itself a violation. A debt buyer that applied before that date may lawfully continue operating for as long as the commissioner has neither approved nor denied the application. Whether a given debt buyer filed in time, and whether its application is still pending, are facts held in the commissioner's licensing records rather than questions the statute answers. The text also does not say how a debt buyer that had not yet applied was to be treated between August 1, 2021, when the requirement took effect, and the January 1, 2022 filing deadline.
WHO FELL OUTSIDE THE TERM "COLLECTION AGENCY" UNDER THE 2021 TEXT. Read the following list with its date attached. Minn. Stat. 332.32 was amended by 2026 Minn. Laws ch. 124, art. 1, sec. 57, effective August 1, 2026, and what is quoted here is the version enacted in 2021, not the text now in force. As enacted in 2021, paragraph (a) excluded "banks when collecting accounts owed to the banks and when the bank will sustain any loss arising from uncollectible accounts, abstract companies doing an escrow business, real estate brokers, public officers, persons acting under order of a court, lawyers, trust companies, insurance companies, credit unions, savings associations, loan or finance companies unless they are engaged in asserting, enforcing or prosecuting unsecured claims which have been purchased from any person, firm, or association when there is recourse to the seller for all or part of the claim if the claim is not collected." The "unless" clause is the operative limit on the last item: a loan or finance company loses the exclusion when it asserts, enforces or prosecutes purchased unsecured claims on which the seller retains recourse. Paragraph (b) added a further exclusion for "a trade association performing services authorized by section 604.15, subdivision 4a", while providing that such an association "may not engage in any conduct that would be prohibited for a collection agency under section 332.37".
Licensing scope limit: 332.3352 lets the Commissioner waive licensing entirely for a nonresident agency: "The commissioner of commerce may, by order, waive the licensing and registration requirements of this chapter for a nonresident collection agency and the nonresident collection agency's affiliated collectors if: (1) a written reciprocal licensing agreement is in effect between the commissioner and the licensing officials of the nonresident collection agency's home state; and (2) the nonresident collection agency is licensed in good standing in the nonresident collection agency's home state." (2) STATUTORY EXCLUSIONS.
Read the full rule
IMPORTANT LIMITS - do not assert that a given collector must be Minnesota-licensed without checking three carve-outs. (1) RECIPROCITY WAIVER. Minn. Stat.
332.3352 lets the Commissioner waive licensing entirely for a nonresident agency: "The commissioner of commerce may, by order, waive the licensing and registration requirements of this chapter for a nonresident collection agency and the nonresident collection agency's affiliated collectors if: (1) a written reciprocal licensing agreement is in effect between the commissioner and the licensing officials of the nonresident collection agency's home state; and (2) the nonresident collection agency is licensed in good standing in the nonresident collection agency's home state." (2) STATUTORY EXCLUSIONS. Minn. Stat. 332.32(a) excludes from "collection agency" banks collecting accounts they own and bear the loss on, abstract companies doing an escrow business, real estate brokers, public officers, persons acting under order of a court, lawyers, trust companies, insurance companies, credit unions, savings associations, and loan or finance companies (the last group only so long as they are not enforcing unsecured claims purchased with recourse to the seller); paragraph (b) excludes a trade association performing services authorized by Minn. Stat. 604.15, subd. 4a. An original creditor collecting its own non-medical debt in its own name is generally outside chapter 332 altogether. (3) NEW AS OF AUGUST 1, 2026 - MORTGAGE AND STUDENT LOAN SERVICERS. Minn. Stat. 332.32 was amended by 2026 Minn. Laws ch. 124, art. 1, sec. 57 (H.F. 4188, presented to the governor May 20, 2026 and signed May 27, 2026), which adds paragraph (c): "The term 'collection agency' does not include a residential mortgage servicer licensed under chapter 58 or a student loan servicer licensed under chapter 58B if the residential mortgage servicer or student loan servicer is engaging in activities subject to licensure under chapter 58 or 58B, as applicable." Section 57 carries no effective-date clause, so under Minn. Stat. 645.02 it took effect August 1, 2026 and is in force now. As of 2026-09-04 the revisor's codified page for 332.32 still displayed only paragraphs (a) and (b) while carrying a banner that the section "has been amended by Chapter 124, Article 1, Section 57" - the session law text governs. PRACTICAL EFFECT: do not demand a Minnesota collection agency license from a licensed residential mortgage servicer or student loan servicer that is acting within its chapter 58 or 58B licensed activity, and do not treat that entity's lack of a chapter 332 license as a violation.
Enforcement agency url: https://www.ag.state.mn.us/office/complaint.asp
Statute of limitations: Six years, and - unusually favorable to Minnesota consumers - it cannot be restarted. Minn. Stat. 541.053: "Notwithstanding section 541.31, subdivision 1, actions upon an obligation arising out of a consumer debt primarily for personal, family, or household purposes shall be commenced within six years.
Read the full rule
After its expiration, the statute of limitations is not revived by the collection of a payment on an account, a discharge in a bankruptcy proceeding, or an oral or written reaffirmation of the debt." This is a significant departure from the common-law rule in many states, where a partial payment restarts the clock. In Minnesota, once six years have run, making a payment does NOT revive the debt. The general six-year contract limitations period is at Minn. Stat. 541.05, subd. 1(1): actions "upon a contract or other obligation, express or implied, as to which no other limitation is expressly prescribed" must be commenced within six years.
Medical debt cap detail: The $1,000 figure is the amount printed in the statute as enacted, but it is inflation-indexed and the first adjustment date has already passed, so a letter must not print it as the current cap. Minn. Stat.
Read the full rule
332C.05(d): "The dollar amount limit under paragraph (b), clause (2), changes on July 1 of each even-numbered year in an amount equal to changes made in the Consumer Price Index, compiled by the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics. The Consumer Price Index for December 2024 is the reference base index." Minn. Stat. 332C.05(f): "The attorney general must publish the base reference index under paragraph (d) in the State Register no later than September 1, 2024. The attorney general must calculate and publish the revised Consumer Price Index under paragraph (d) in the State Register no later than September 1 each even-numbered year." The first adjustment date was July 1, 2026, which is in the past as of 2026-09-04. I searched for the Attorney General's State Register publication of the revised index and could not locate it. Until someone reads that notice, write the cap as: "additional damages as the court may allow, capped at $1,000 per violation as enacted, a cap adjusted for inflation on July 1 of each even-numbered year under Minn. Stat. 332C.05(d), with the revised figure published by the Attorney General in the State Register" - and do not print a precise current number. Two further limits to keep in the same sentence as the number: the cap is discretionary, because the statute says "additional damages as the court may allow"; and the treble multiplier at 332C.05(c) applies only to paragraph (b) clauses (1) and (2), not to the costs and attorney fees in clause (3).
Private right of action: For non-medical debt there is NO EXPRESS private right of action under Minnesota's Collection Agencies Act, and no letter should threaten a chapter 332 damages suit.
Read the full rule
This is a positive finding, not an unsearched gap.
Every enforcement provision in the 332.31-332.44 range was read: 332.39 (injunctions, available to "The attorney general or the county attorney of any county"), 332.40 (Commissioner investigation, suspension, revocation), 332.355 (Commissioner action against licensees and collectors), 332.43 (receivership). None creates a consumer cause of action, and no damages or remedies section exists in that range. The contrast inside the same chapter is telling: the legislature plainly knows how to write a private remedy and did so at Minn. Stat. 332.60 ("A buyer suffering damages as a result of a violation of sections 332.52 to 332.58 by a credit services organization may bring an action for recovery of damages") and at Minn. Stat. 332.74 (debtor remedies for coerced debt) - but not for collection agencies. A federal district court reached the same conclusion in Edeh v. Midland Credit Management, Inc., 748 F. Supp. 2d 1030 (D. Minn. 2010): "Judge Noel found, and the Court agrees, that no private right of action exists under the Minnesota Collection Agencies Act." SCOPE OF THAT FINDING - state it precisely, because the absolute version is wrong. The correct statement is that sections 332.31 to 332.44 contain no EXPRESS private right of action, not that the Commissioner, the Attorney General and county attorneys are the only possible enforcers. Minnesota's private attorney general statute, Minn. Stat. 8.31, subd. 3a, gives "any person injured by a violation of any of the laws referred to in subdivision 1" a damages action, and subdivision 1 reaches "the law of this state respecting unfair, discriminatory, and other unlawful practices in business, commerce, or trade, and specifically, but not exclusively," an enumerated list that does not name chapter 332. The words "but not exclusively" make chapter 332's inclusion a litigable question rather than a closed door - but it is unresolved, Edeh rejected such a claim, and a private 8.31 plaintiff must additionally satisfy the public-benefit requirement Minnesota courts impose. Do not assert an 8.31 theory in a letter as if it were settled. What the consumer reliably holds for non-medical debt is the federal FDCPA (see fdcpa_fallback), plus a Department of Commerce complaint that puts the collector's license at stake.
Coerced debt scope limit: SCOPE LIMITS - narrow, and both must be checked before invoking. (1) Eligible people only: Minn. Stat. 332.71, subd. 4 defines 'debtor' as a person who "(1) is a victim of domestic abuse, economic abuse, or sex or labor trafficking, and (2) owes coerced debt," and the notice must be backed by 'documentation' — Minn.
Read the full rule
Stat. 332.71, subd. 5 lists four forms: a police report, an FTC identity theft report, a chapter 518 dissolution order declaring the debts coerced, or "(4) a sworn written certification". Under subd. 12 a 'sworn written certification' is NOT the consumer's own statement: it is a certification, in the statutory form and under penalty of perjury, by a 'qualified third-party professional' as defined in subd. 10 (a domestic abuse advocate under 595.02 subd. 1(l), a sexual assault counselor under 595.02 subd. 1(k), a licensed health care provider, mental health care provider, social worker, or marriage and family therapist, or a Minnesota nonprofit providing direct assistance to victims of domestic abuse, sexual assault, or sex or labor trafficking) who has had in-person or face-to-face electronic contact with the debtor. The consumer must obtain that certification from such a professional before the certified-mail notice can be sent. (2) Effective date: the 2023 enacting law states "This section is effective January 1, 2024, and applies to all debts incurred on or after that date." Debts incurred before January 1, 2024 are outside the coerced-debt regime entirely. Secured debt is also excluded (Minn. Stat. 332.71, subd. 2(b)). Amendments to 332.71, 332.72, 332.73 and 332.74 under 2024 Minn. Laws ch. 114, art. 3 took effect January 1, 2025 (332.73 subd. 1 now requires the signed statement described in coerced_debt_written_demand).
Medical debt scope limit: Chapter 332C was created by 2024 Minn. Laws ch. 114, art. 3 (Commercial Regulation and Consumer Protection), secs. 77 through 81, which enacted Minn. Stat.
Read the full rule
332C.01 (definitions), 332C.02 (prohibited practices), 332C.03 (medical debt reporting prohibited), 332C.04 (defending medical debt cases) and 332C.05 (enforcement). Each limit below can decide whether a chapter 332C claim exists at all.
(1) EFFECTIVE DATE. All five sections share the same effective date. The clause enacted with secs. 77, 78, 79 and 81 reads, word for word, "This section is effective October 1, 2024." Sec. 80, which became Minn. Stat. 332C.04, carries the same date plus one additional limit, and reads in full: "This section is effective October 1, 2024, for causes of action commenced on or after that date." The dates are uniform; what differs is reach. Minn. Stat. 332C.02, 332C.03 and 332C.05 carry no clause of their own about the conduct they reach, so on the ordinary reading their conduct rules and their damages remedy govern collection conduct occurring on or after October 1, 2024 - a reading that rests on the general presumption against retroactive application of a statute rather than on anything chapter 332C itself says. The fee award in Minn. Stat. 332C.04 turns instead on when the collecting party's claim was commenced. So a medical debt incurred before October 1, 2024 can still support a 332C.04 fee award, provided the collecting party's claim for payment was commenced on or after that date and the limits in (2), (3) and (5) below are also met. The statute does not say when a claim is "commenced" for this purpose, so that boundary is not settled by the text of chapter 332C. The text also does not say how the chapter applies to a course of collection that began before October 1, 2024 and continued after it.
(2) THE 332C.04 FEE AWARD CARRIES ITS OWN QUALIFIERS. The award is mandatory in form but not open-ended in amount. Minn. Stat. 332C.04(a): "A debtor who successfully defends against a claim for payment of medical debt that is alleged by a collecting party must be awarded the debtor's costs and a reasonable attorney fee, as determined by the court, incurred to defend against the collecting party's claim for debt payment." The words "as determined by the court" govern the amount, so the fee is what the court fixes rather than what the debtor claims. A negotiated outcome is not a successful defense for this purpose. Minn. Stat. 332C.04(b): "For purposes of this section, a resolution mutually agreed upon by the debtor and collecting party is not a successful defense subject to an additional award of an attorney fee."
(3) WHAT COUNTS AS MEDICAL DEBT. Minn. Stat. 332C.01, subd. 4(a): "'Medical debt' means debt incurred primarily for medically necessary health treatment or services. Medical debt includes debt charged to a credit card or other credit instrument, on or after October 1, 2024, under an open-end or closed-end credit plan offered specifically to pay for health treatment or services." Credit-plan charges are therefore covered only if made on or after October 1, 2024, and only under a plan offered specifically to pay for health treatment or services. Subdivision 4(b) then provides that "Medical debt does not include:" four things. First, "debt charged to a credit card or other credit instrument, under an open-end or closed-end credit plan, that is not offered specifically to pay for health treatment or services". Second, "services provided by a veterinarian". Third, "services provided by a dentist". Fourth, "debt charged to a home equity line of credit". Dental and veterinary bills fall outside chapter 332C entirely, which is easy to miss because a dental bill is commonly described as a medical one.
(4) "MEDICALLY NECESSARY" IS A DEFINED TERM. Chapter 332C does not define it in its own words. Minn. Stat. 332C.01, subd. 5: "'Medically necessary' has the meaning given in section 62J.805, subdivision 7." The test itself therefore sits outside chapter 332C, in a section that is not quoted on this page. Described rather than quoted, it is a multi-part test: the treatment or service must be safe and effective; must not be experimental or investigational; must be furnished in accordance with acceptable medical standards to diagnose or treat the patient's condition or improve the function of a malformed body member; must be furnished in an appropriate setting; must be ordered and furnished by qualified personnel; must meet but not exceed the patient's medical need; and must be at least as beneficial as an available medically appropriate alternative. Purely elective or cosmetic care is unlikely to satisfy that test.
(5) WHO IS A COLLECTING PARTY is broad, with one carve-out. Minn. Stat. 332C.01, subd. 2: "'Collecting party' means a party engaged in collecting medical debt. Collecting party does not include parties when complying with a court order or statutory obligation to garnish or levy a debtor's property, including banks, credit unions, public officers, and garnishees." The definition reaches an original hospital or clinic collecting in its own name, not only a third-party agency. It does not reach a bank, credit union, public officer or garnishee acting under a garnishment or levy obligation.
(6) THE DAMAGES FIGURE IS A CEILING, IT IS DISCRETIONARY, AND IT MOVES. Minn. Stat. 332C.05(b)(2) allows "additional damages as the court may allow, but not exceeding $1,000 per violation". The court decides whether to allow additional damages and in what amount, up to that ceiling. The ceiling is indexed. Minn. Stat. 332C.05(d): "The dollar amount limit under paragraph (b), clause (2), changes on July 1 of each even-numbered year in an amount equal to changes made in the Consumer Price Index, compiled by the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics. The Consumer Price Index for December 2024 is the reference base index." The revised index is not published in the chapter. Minn. Stat. 332C.05(f): "The attorney general must calculate and publish the revised Consumer Price Index under paragraph (d) in the State Register no later than September 1 each even-numbered year." The first change date under paragraph (d) was July 1, 2026. The $1,000 stated here is accordingly the figure as enacted; whether and by how much the ceiling has moved since is not answered by chapter 332C, and no current ceiling is asserted on this page. Liability is also defeasible. Minn. Stat. 332C.05(g): "A collecting party must not be held liable in any action brought under this section if the collecting party shows by a preponderance of evidence that the violation:" and then, in clause (1), "was not intentional and resulted from a bona fide error made notwithstanding the maintenance of procedures reasonably adopted to avoid any bona fide error", or, in clause (2), "was the result of inaccurate or incorrect information provided to the collecting party by a health care provider as defined in section 62J.805, subdivision 4; a health carrier as defined in section 62A.011, subdivision 2; or another collecting party currently or previously engaged in collection of the medical debt in question."
(7) WHEN THE DEBT IS OUTSIDE THE CHAPTER, AND WHAT IS AND IS NOT LEFT. Dental debt, veterinary debt, home equity line of credit debt, and debt charged to a credit card or other credit instrument under a plan not offered specifically to pay for health treatment or services - an ordinary general-purpose card, for example - are excluded by Minn. Stat. 332C.01, subd. 4(b). For those debts no chapter 332C remedy is available, and the per-violation additional damages under Minn. Stat. 332C.05(b)(2) do not apply. What is left is whatever other law happens to reach the particular party doing the collecting. That is a conditional fallback, not a second body of rules that automatically takes over, because neither of the usual alternatives is written in the broad terms chapter 332C uses for a "collecting party". The collection agency, debt buyer and collector standards of Minn. Stat. ch. 332 - the licensing requirement of Minn. Stat. 332.33, subd. 1 and the prohibited practices of Minn. Stat. 332.37 - reach only the parties that chapter defines. Minn. Stat. 332.37(a) opens "No collection agency, debt buyer, or collector shall", and each of those three is a defined term. Minn. Stat. 332.31, subd. 3 defines a "collection agency" as a person "engaged in the business of collection for others any account, bill, or other indebtedness", or alternatively a debt buyer. Minn. Stat. 332.31, subd. 8 defines a "debt buyer" as "a business engaged in the purchase of any charged-off account, bill, or other indebtedness for collection purposes, whether the business collects the account, bill, or other indebtedness, hires a third party for collection, or hires an attorney for litigation related to the collection." Minn. Stat. 332.31, subd. 6 defines a "collector" as a person acting under the authority of a collection agency or of a debt buyer, and on its behalf. Minn. Stat. 332.32 then removes further parties from the term "collection agency" by an express exclusion list, which is set out elsewhere on this page. A hospital, clinic or dental office that is collecting its own bill in its own name, and that did not buy the debt, is collecting for itself rather than for others; on those definitions it is none of the three, and the chapter 332 standards do not run against it. The federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act is limited in the same structural way: it runs against a "debt collector" as that Act itself defines the term, a definition that belongs to federal law and is not quoted on this page, so this page does not decide whether it covers any particular party. The result is the reverse of the position under chapter 332C set out in (5) above. There, a "collecting party" reaches the original hospital or clinic collecting in its own name. Here, for a bill the chapter does not cover, that same original provider can fall outside the chapter 332 standards and outside the federal Act as well. The fallback has force where the bill has been placed with a collection agency, sold to a debt buyer, or worked by a collector on their behalf, and it can be empty where the provider never let the bill leave its own hands.
Medical debt fee shifting: Minn. Stat. 332C.04(a): "A debtor who successfully defends against a claim for payment of medical debt that is alleged by a collecting party must be awarded the debtor's costs and a reasonable attorney fee, as determined by the court, incurred to defend against the collecting party's claim for debt payment." This is mandatory ('must be awarded'), and it is real settlement leverage: it means a collecting party that sues on a weak medical debt is exposed to the consumer's legal fees.
Read the full rule
Caution - paragraph (b) closes the obvious loophole: "a resolution mutually agreed upon by the debtor and collecting party is not a successful defense subject to an additional award of an attorney fee." So a negotiated settlement forfeits the fee award. Effective-date limit that belongs with this remedy: 332C.04 alone among the chapter 332C sections was enacted as effective "October 1, 2024, for causes of action commenced on or after that date" (2024 Minn. Laws ch. 114, art. 3, sec. 80), so the fee award is unavailable in a suit the collecting party commenced before that date.
Practical letter guidance: Before drafting, establish two things. First, is this medical debt as chapter 332C defines it - medically necessary treatment or services, not dental, not veterinary, not an ordinary credit card, not a HELOC? If yes, the letter can make a genuine damages demand under Minn. Stat.
Read the full rule
332C.05 and should itemize each violation separately, because damages run per violation - but it must not say that damages follow automatically: 332C.05(g) is a complete defense for a bona fide error made despite reasonable procedures, or for a violation caused by inaccurate information from a health care provider, health carrier, or prior collecting party. The letter should demand that the collecting party state in writing whether it will rely on 332C.05(g)(1) or (g)(2), identify the source of the information it relied on, and produce the underlying records. If no, the letter should be built on the FDCPA for damages and on Minn. Stat. 332.37 plus a Department of Commerce complaint for pressure, and must not threaten a chapter 332 damages suit. Second, check the date the debt was incurred and the date of the conduct complained of: chapter 332C reaches conduct on or after October 1, 2024, and the coerced-debt provisions reach only debts incurred on or after January 1, 2024.
Coerced debt written demand: Minnesota has a second, narrower written-demand mechanism with a hard statutory deadline that fits a certified-mail letter product precisely. Minn. Stat. 332.73, subd.
Read the full rule
1(a): "Before taking an affirmative action under section 332.74, a debtor must, by certified mail, notify a creditor that the debt or a portion of a debt on which the creditor demands payment is coerced debt and request that the creditor cease all collection activity on the coerced debt. The notification and request must be in writing and include documentation." Since January 1, 2025 (2024 Minn. Laws ch. 114, art. 3, secs. 74-76), subd. 1(a) continues: "If not already included in documentation, the notification must include a signed statement that includes: (1) an assertion that the debtor is a victim of domestic abuse, economic abuse, or sex or labor trafficking; (2) a recitation of the facts supporting the claim that the debt is coerced; and (3) if only a portion of the debt is claimed to be coerced debt, an itemization of the portion..." — so unless the documentation already includes those elements, a certified-mail notice without that signed statement does not satisfy subd. 1(a). Subd. 1(b) adds that a creditor that ceases collection but later decides to resume collection activity "must notify the debtor ten days prior", and subd. 1(c): "A debtor must not proceed with an action under section 332.74 until the 30-day period provided under paragraph (a) has expired." Paragraph (b) sets the deadline: "The creditor, within 30 days of the date the notification and request is received, must notify the debtor in writing of the creditor's decision to either immediately cease all collection activity or continue to pursue collection." 'Creditor' is defined broadly at Minn. Stat. 332.71, subd. 3 as "a person, or the person's successor, assignee, or agent, claiming to own or have the right to collect a debt owed by the debtor," so this notice binds debt buyers and collection agencies, not just original creditors. Remedies, if the creditor does not stand down, are at Minn. Stat. 332.74: declaratory judgment that the debt is coerced, an injunction against holding the debtor liable, and dismissal of any collection action.
Medical debt credit reporting: Minnesota bans medical debt from credit reports outright, in both directions. Minn. Stat. 332C.03: "(a) A collecting party is prohibited from reporting medical debt to a consumer reporting agency.
Read the full rule
(b) A consumer reporting agency is prohibited from making a consumer report containing an item of information that the consumer reporting agency knows or should know concerns medical debt." Paragraph (d) confirms the reach: "This section also applies to collection agencies and debt buyers licensed under chapter 332." A medical debt appearing on a credit report is a demand point against the COLLECTING PARTY that reported it: Minn. Stat. 332C.05(b) makes "a collecting party that violates this chapter" liable, subject to the complete affirmative defense in 332C.05(g) (bona fide error despite reasonable procedures, or inaccurate information supplied by a provider, carrier, or prior collecting party). It is NOT a 332C.05 damages claim against the consumer reporting agency - paragraph (b) of 332C.03 binds the agency, but 332C.05 reaches only a "collecting party," so the remedy against a bureau that keeps reporting the item is the federal FCRA dispute route, not a Minnesota damages demand.
Medical debt prohibited conduct: Minn. Stat. 332C.02 lists 21 prohibited practices for anyone collecting medical debt. The highest-value ones for a letter: clause (20) bars a collecting party from "report[ing] to a credit reporting agency any medical debt that the collecting party knows or should know is or was originally owed to a health care…
Read the full rule
provider, as defined in section 62J.805, subdivision 4." Clause (18) requires that initial mail contact carry a disclosure, in type at least as large as the largest type in the notice, that "includes and identifies the Office of the Minnesota Attorney General's general telephone number, and states: 'You have the right to hire your own attorney to represent you in this matter.'" Clause (10) bars communicating about medical debt "by use of an automatic telephone dialing system or an artificial or prerecorded voice" after the debtor says to stop, and expressly extends that to "artificial intelligence chat bots" and to the term as used in the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. 227(b)(1)(A). Clause (11) bars implying or suggesting "that medically necessary health treatment or services are denied as a result of a medical debt." Clause (19) bars commencing legal action outside the 541.053 limitations period. Clause (21) bars challenging "a debtor's claim of exemption to garnishment or levy in a manner that is baseless, frivolous, or otherwise in bad faith." Clause (13) requires giving the debtor, when attempting to collect a medical debt, "the full name of the collecting party, as registered with the secretary of state." Clause (16) governs added interest and fees and carries its own court-costs carve-out - see prohibited_conduct_defeasibility_flag. SCOPE LIMIT ON THE FEDERAL INCORPORATION: clause (9) does not incorporate the FDCPA statute the way Minn. Stat. 332.37(a)(12) does; it bars a collecting party, "unless an exemption in the law exists," from violating "Code of Federal Regulations, title 12, part 1006" (Regulation F), and it then limits both: "For purposes of this section, Public Law 95-109 and Code of Federal Regulations, title 12, part 1006, apply to collecting parties other than health care providers collecting medical debt in the health care provider's own name." So a hospital or clinic collecting its own medical debt in its own name is covered by the rest of chapter 332C but is NOT reached through clause (9) by the FDCPA or Regulation F.
Private right of action medical: For MEDICAL debt there IS a direct private right of action, subject to a complete affirmative defense that must be stated with it. Minn. Stat.
Read the full rule
332C.05(b): "A collecting party that violates this chapter is strictly liable to the debtor in question for the sum of: (1) actual damage sustained by the debtor as a result of the violation; (2) additional damages as the court may allow, but not exceeding $1,000 per violation; and (3) in the case of any successful action to enforce the foregoing, the costs of the action, together with a reasonable attorney fee as determined by the court." Minn. Stat. 332C.05(c) adds: "A collecting party that willfully and maliciously violates this chapter is strictly liable to the debtor for three times the sums allowable under paragraph (b), clauses (1) and (2)" - note that trebling reaches clauses (1) and (2) only, not the costs and attorney fees in clause (3). Three features make this stronger than the federal FDCPA: liability does not require proof of intent; the statutory damages run per violation rather than per action; and willful and malicious conduct trebles both actual and statutory damages. THE DEFENSE THAT MUST TRAVEL WITH THE CLAIM: liability is strict as to intent but it is not absolute. Minn. Stat. 332C.05(g): "A collecting party must not be held liable in any action brought under this section if the collecting party shows by a preponderance of evidence that the violation: (1) was not intentional and resulted from a bona fide error made notwithstanding the maintenance of procedures reasonably adopted to avoid any bona fide error; or (2) was the result of inaccurate or incorrect information provided to the collecting party by a health care provider, as defined in section 62J.805, subdivision 4; a health carrier, as defined in section 62A.011, subdivision 2; or another collecting party currently or previously engaged in collection of the medical debt in question." Paragraph (g)(2) is not an edge case - a wrong balance handed over by the hospital, the insurer, or a prior agency is the single most common cause of medical-collection error, and it is a complete defense. A letter must therefore never say that damages automatically follow from the violation. The correct demand is that the collecting party state in writing whether it intends to rely on 332C.05(g)(1) or (g)(2), identify the source of the information it relied on, and produce the underlying records. Also note that the $1,000 figure is CPI-indexed - see medical_debt_cap_detail.
Attorney general private remedy note: CAUTION on Minn. Stat. 8.31, subd. 3a (the Minnesota "private attorney general" statute) - it is an open question, not a usable claim.
Read the full rule
Its text is broad: "In addition to the remedies otherwise provided by law, any person injured by a violation of any of the laws referred to in subdivision 1 may bring a civil action and recover damages, together with costs and disbursements, including costs of investigation and reasonable attorney's fees, and receive other equitable relief as determined by the court." Subdivision 1 covers "the law of this state respecting unfair, discriminatory, and other unlawful practices in business, commerce, or trade, and specifically, but not exclusively," an enumerated list that names the Nonprofit Corporation Act, the Act Against Unfair Discrimination and Competition, the Unlawful Trade Practices Act, the Antitrust Act, section 325F.67, section 325D.67, section 325D.68, section 325E.39, the Prevention of Consumer Fraud Act (sections 325F.68 to 325F.70), and chapter 53A. Chapter 332 is NOT in that list. The phrase "but not exclusively" keeps the question open rather than closing it, so the honest statement is that a private 8.31 claim premised on a chapter 332 violation is unresolved: no Minnesota appellate decision resolves it, Edeh rejected a chapter 332 private claim, and any private 8.31 plaintiff must also satisfy the public-benefit requirement Minnesota courts impose on private attorney general claims. DO NOT assert an 8.31 private claim for non-medical collection conduct in a letter as though it were settled. For medical debt the argument is unnecessary: Minn. Stat. 332C.05(a) says "The attorney general may enforce this chapter under section 8.31," and paragraph (b) independently grants the debtor a direct action.
Prohibited conduct defeasibility flag: FLAG - the no-junk-fees rule is defeasible by the underlying contract, and the medical-debt version has its own carve-out. Minn. Stat.
Read the full rule
332.37(a)(20) permits any "interest, fee, charge, or expense incidental to the charge-off obligation" whenever the amount "is expressly authorized by the agreement creating the debt or is otherwise permitted by law." The medical-debt twin, Minn. Stat. 332C.02(16), is worded differently and must be quoted in its own words: it bars a collecting party from, "except for court costs for filing a civil action with the court and service of process, attempt[ing] to collect any interest, fee, charge, or expense incidental to the charge-off obligation from a debtor unless the amount is expressly authorized by the agreement creating the medical debt or is otherwise permitted by law." Two consequences. First, a letter must NOT flatly assert that added fees are illegal; the correct demand is that the collector produce the contract term authorizing each added amount, because if the agreement authorizes the charge the statute does not bar it. Second, in a medical debt case, court filing fees and service-of-process costs are carved out at the front of clause (16) and need no contract term at all - do not demand contractual authority for those two line items.
What a consumer can demand in writing: A Minnesota consumer can put the following in a written, certified-mail demand. (1) Validation and a halt to collection: under the federal FDCPA, 15 U.S.C.
Read the full rule
1692g, if the consumer notifies the collector in writing within "thirty days after receipt of the notice" that the debt is disputed, "the debt collector shall cease collection of the debt, or any disputed portion thereof, until the debt collector obtains verification of the debt or a copy of a judgment, or the name and address of the original creditor." (2) Stop automated calls: Minn. Stat. 332.37(a)(13) makes further recorded/auto-dialer contact unlawful once "the debtor expressly informs the agency or collector to cease communication utilizing an automatic dialing announcing device"; for medical debt Minn. Stat. 332C.02(10) extends this to artificial or prerecorded voices and AI chat bots. A written cease-auto-dialing instruction is therefore self-executing under state law. (3) Demand the contract term behind every added fee, invoking Minn. Stat. 332.37(a)(20) or 332C.02(16). (4) Demand the collector's full licensed name and license status, invoking Minn. Stat. 332.37(a)(16) and (23) - EXCEPT where the entity is a residential mortgage servicer licensed under chapter 58 or a student loan servicer licensed under chapter 58B acting within that licensed activity: since August 1, 2026, Minn. Stat. 332.32(c) (2026 Minn. Laws ch. 124, art. 1, sec. 57) removes those servicers from the definition of "collection agency," so no chapter 332 license or 332.37 disclosure can be demanded of them (see licensing_scope_limit). (5) For medical debt, demand deletion from all credit reports under Minn. Stat. 332C.03 and state the 332C.05 exposure - strict as to intent, but subject to the 332C.05(g) defense - and demand that the collecting party say in writing whether it relies on (g)(1) or (g)(2) and on what information. (6) Assert the 541.053 six-year bar and state that suing anyway violates 332.37(a)(24) or 332C.02(19).
Statute of limitations enforcement hook: The limitations period is not merely a defense in Minnesota - suing on a time-barred consumer debt is itself a statutory violation. Minn. Stat.
Read the full rule
332.37(a)(24) prohibits a collection agency, debt buyer, or collector from "commenc[ing] legal action to collect a debt outside the limitations period set forth in section 541.053," and Minn. Stat. 332C.02(19) imposes the identical prohibition on anyone collecting medical debt. For medical debt that violation carries the 332C.05 damages, subject to the 332C.05(g) bona-fide-error and bad-information defenses; for other debt it is a regulatory violation reportable to the Department of Commerce, and any damages claim would have to rest on the federal FDCPA rather than chapter 332 (see fdcpa_fallback).

Read this before relying on the numbers above

SOURCES. The Minnesota provisions quoted on this page are taken from the enrolled session laws that enacted or amended them, as published by the Minnesota Office of the Revisor of Statutes. Chapter 332C comes from 2024 Minn. Laws ch. 114, art. 3 (Commercial Regulation and Consumer Protection), secs. 77 through 81, which enacted Minn. Stat. 332C.01 through 332C.05. The collection agency and debt buyer licensing provisions come from 2021 Minn. Laws 1st Spec. Sess. ch. 4, art. 5 (Collection Agencies and Debt Buyers), which added the debt buyer definition at Minn. Stat. 332.31, subd. 8, amended the exclusions at Minn. Stat. 332.32, and amended the licensing requirement at Minn. Stat. 332.33, subd. 1. The remaining chapter 332 provisions are quoted from the codified Minnesota Statutes on the Revisor's site, and the coerced-debt provisions from 2023 Minn. Laws ch. 57. Federal text is quoted from 15 U.S.C. 1692g and 1692k as published by the Office of the Law Revision Counsel. The private-right-of-action holding is taken from the official Government Publishing Office copy of the opinion itself, not from a summary. The Minnesota Attorney General's complaint page is the agency contact given; no Department of Commerce page is cited or relied on.

CURRENCY. This version was verified on September 6, 2026. One cited provision is not current as quoted: Minn. Stat. 332.32 was amended by 2026 Minn. Laws ch. 124, art. 1, sec. 57, effective August 1, 2026, and the exclusion list set out on this page is the version enacted in 2021. The chapter 332C provisions and Minn. Stat. 332.31, subd. 8 and 332.33, subd. 1 are quoted as enacted, and no later amendment to them is reflected. Two items are paraphrased rather than quoted and are marked as such where they appear: the multi-part "medically necessary" test, which lives in the cross-referenced Minn. Stat. 62J.805, subd. 7 rather than in chapter 332C; and the two branches of the Minn. Stat. 332C.05(g) defense.

WHAT THE STATUTORY TEXT DOES NOT SETTLE. Several points on this page are boundaries rather than answers, and are written that way. Minn. Stat. 332C.04 applies to causes of action "commenced" on or after October 1, 2024, but neither chapter 332C nor the enacting session law says when a claim is commenced, so whether a particular suit falls inside that section is not resolved by the statutory text. Chapter 332C also says nothing about a course of collection that began before October 1, 2024 and continued afterward, so its application to conduct straddling the effective date is open. The additional damages ceiling in Minn. Stat. 332C.05(b)(2) is indexed to the Consumer Price Index and first changed on July 1, 2026; the adjusted figure is published by the attorney general in the State Register and does not appear in the chapter, so no current dollar ceiling is asserted anywhere on this page and the $1,000 figure is identified as the amount as enacted. On the licensing side, whether a specific debt buyer applied before January 1, 2022 and whether its application remains pending are facts held in the commissioner's licensing records rather than questions the statute answers, and the statute does not address a debt buyer that had not yet applied during the window between August 1, 2021 and January 1, 2022.

Read it yourself

Official sources. If a number below matters to your case, open the statute and read it — laws get amended, and cities often stack stricter local rules on top.

Last checked: 2026-09-07

Send this as a certified letter

Jab drafts the letter, a licensed attorney reviews it, and we mail it USPS Certified Mail with a signed return receipt. $29 flat. You can also write it yourself — this page has what you need.

Start my letter →

Jab Today is not a law firm and this is not legal advice. This page describes how the statutes read, which is a different thing from what will happen in your case. Laws are amended and local ordinances often add stricter rules. For advice about your situation, consult a licensed attorney in your state.