By the Division of Banks

You may view and print this full selected Opinion as Adobe Acrobat PDF File pdf format of 13-018w.pdf

This letter was issued in coordination with the withdrawals of Opinion 13-018 pdf format of 13-018.pdf
dated 11/2/15 and Opinion 16-002 pdf format of 16-002.pdf
dated 2/11/16 as of 4/1/16.

April 1, 2016


Kenneth C. Wilson
Managing Attorney/President
Lustig, Glaser & Wilson, P.C.
P.O. Box 549287
Waltham, MA 02454-9826

Dear Mr. Wilson:

This letter is in further response to your correspondence dated September 19, 2013 and October 21, 2013 to the Division of Banks (Division) in which you requested an opinion relative to whether the law firm of Lustig, Glaser and Wilson, P.C. (LGW) would be required to obtain a debt collector license from the Division in order to engage in consumer debt collection activity in the Commonwealth.  As you know, the Division responded on November 2, 2015 and determined that LGW would need to be licensed as a debt collector based on the activities specified.

 Since the issuance of the November 2nd letter, the Division has reconsidered its recent interpretation of the attorney-at-law exemption set forth at Mass. Gen. Law ch. 93, § 24.  As a result of the Division’s further consideration of the statutory language of ch. 93, § 24, the Division has determined that it will withdraw its November 2nd opinion (and its related follow up opinion dated February 11, 2016) as of today’s date.  Therefore, the Division will not require LGW, or other similarly situated law firms, to become licensed solely because LGW is primarily engaged in consumer debt collection or regularly collects consumer debt.  As this appears to be the question you presented in your September and October of 2013 correspondence, the Division has determined that this is responsive to your request.



Merrily S. Gerrish
Deputy Commissioner of Banks
and General Counsel

cc: Suleyken Walker, Assistant Attorney General