Seven calls in seven days: what the rule is, and what it is not
Under Regulation F, a debt collector that places more than seven telephone calls to you in seven days about one debt, or calls again within seven days after talking to you about it, is presumed to be harassing you. It is a presumption, not an automatic violation, it counts telephone calls only, and a collector who stays under it can still break the law.
People call us after reading about "the seven-call rule" and ask one of two questions. "They called me eight times this week. Do I have a case?" Or: "They only called five times, but it was every morning at the same minute. Is that allowed?"
The honest answer to the first is: maybe, and it is a good start. The answer to the second is also maybe, and it surprises people. This post explains why, using the text of the regulation and the official interpretation that comes with it.
What the rule says
The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act has always prohibited a collector from causing a telephone to ring, or engaging a person in conversation, "repeatedly or continuously" with intent to annoy, abuse or harass (15 U.S.C. § 1692d(5)). The statute never said how many calls that meant.
Regulation F, which took effect on November 30, 2021, put numbers on it. A debt collector is presumed to violate the rule if it places a telephone call to a person about a particular debt:
- More than seven times within seven consecutive days, or
- Within seven consecutive days after having a telephone conversation with the person about that debt. The day of the conversation is day one.
That is 12 C.F.R. § 1006.14(b)(2). A collector that stays under both limits is presumed to comply with the frequency rule.
Presumed, not proven
A presumption shifts the argument. It is not the end of it. A collector over the limit can try to show it did not intend to harass, and a collector under the limit can still be shown to have harassed you. The rule is a starting point for the evidence, not a scoreboard.
What counts toward the seven
The CFPB's official interpretation of Regulation F answers most of the counting questions.
| Type of contact | Counts toward the seven? |
|---|---|
| A call you answer, even if it drops | Yes |
| A call that rings and no one answers | Yes |
| A call that goes to voicemail, message or not | Yes |
| A ringless voicemail | Yes |
| A busy signal or a number not in service | No, it never connected |
| A call within seven days after you gave the collector permission to call | No |
| A call to your lawyer, or to the creditor | No |
| A text message or an email | No, never |
Two more details matter. The count runs per debt: the regulation defines a particular debt as each of your debts in collection (§ 1006.14(b)(4)). And the seven days are any seven consecutive days, a rolling window, not a calendar week.
What the rule is not
It is not a ban on the eighth call. Nothing in the regulation says the eighth call is automatically illegal. It says the collector is presumed to be harassing you, and the evidence decides.
It is not permission for seven. The official interpretation lists factors that can overcome the presumption of compliance even when a collector stays under the limit. Among them: calls in rapid succession, such as two unanswered calls within five minutes; calls in a highly concentrated burst, such as seven calls in one day; a pattern of voicemails; calling after you said you did not owe the debt, refused to pay, or asked not to be called; and abusive language on earlier calls. The CFPB's own example is a collector who places one call on a Wednesday and six on Friday. That collector is under the limit and presumed to comply, but the Friday burst is a factor that may rebut the presumption.
It is not about texts. Some websites say texts and emails count toward the seven. Under the regulation they do not. That does not make texting harmless. The general harassment rule still applies to texts and emails, and the interpretation says the cumulative effect of a collector's calls and emails together can be harassment even if neither alone would be. Our page on texts, emails and social media covers those rules.
It does not cover everyone who calls about a debt. Regulation F applies to debt collectors under the FDCPA. A bank calling about its own card generally is not one. In Florida, the FCCPA separately prohibits anyone collecting a consumer debt from calling with a frequency that can reasonably be expected to harass.
What to do with this
- Keep a log from today. Date, time, number, whether it rang or went to voicemail, and whether you spoke. Your phone's call history is a start, but it can be overwritten. The call log flags any seven-day window over the limit and any call within seven days after a conversation.
- Screenshot the call history every few days, and save voicemails.
- Say it once, in writing. If you want the calls to stop, a written request to cease communication requires the collector to stop, with narrow exceptions (15 U.S.C. § 1692c(c)). Calling after you told them to stop is also a factor under the interpretation.
- Mind the year. An FDCPA claim must be filed within one year of the violation.
If the pattern is there, the FDCPA provides actual damages plus statutory damages of up to $1,000, and it requires a collector found liable to pay the consumer's reasonable attorney's fees and costs. Our too many calls page covers the full rule, and harassing phone calls covers what a call says, not just how often it comes.
In New York, New Jersey and Florida, state law adds its own layer. The New York, New Jersey and Florida pages explain each.
Sources: 12 C.F.R. § 1006.14(b) (text); Official Interpretations, Supplement I to Part 1006, comments 14(b)-1, 14(b)(2)(i)-1 and -2, 14(b)(3)(ii)-1 (eCFR); 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692c(c), 1692d(5), 1692k.
Common questions
Do unanswered calls count toward the seven?
Yes. The official interpretation says a call counts if it causes your phone to ring, even if no one answers, or if it reaches voicemail, even if the collector does not leave a message. A call that gets a busy signal or an out-of-service message does not count.
Do text messages count?
No. The seven-in-seven count is about telephone calls. The official interpretation says placing a telephone call does not include sending a text or an email. Texts and emails can still be harassment under the general rule if their frequency or content is abusive, and the cumulative effect of calls and texts together can be harassment.
Does the rule apply to the original creditor calling me?
Regulation F applies to debt collectors covered by the FDCPA, which generally does not include a creditor collecting its own debt. In Florida, the FCCPA separately forbids anyone collecting a consumer debt, including a creditor, from calling with a frequency that can reasonably be expected to harass.
What if a collector has three of my debts?
The count runs per debt. The regulation defines a particular debt as each of the consumer's debts in collection, with a special rule for student loans serviced under one account number. A collector with three accounts can place up to seven calls about each before the presumption applies, though the total can still be evidence of harassment.
Tell us what they did.
One conversation with an attorney, in your language. We tell you which laws the collector or the credit bureau broke, which deadline runs first, and what to save this week. If it is not a case we can take, we say so and tell you where to go.
(718) 484-7510The FDCPA and the FCRA require a company found liable to pay the consumer’s reasonable attorney’s fees and costs. Our fee arrangement is confirmed in a written retainer before we begin. English, Russian and Spanish in-house; an interpreter for any other language.