Skip to Content (Press Enter)

Skip to Nav (Press Enter)

Consumer Finance

Subscribe to Consumer Finance

Thank you for your desire to subscribe to Severson & Werson’s Consumer Finance Weblog. In order to subscribe, you must provide a valid name and e-mail address. This too will be retained on our server. When you push the “subscribe button”, we will send an electronic mail to the address that you provided asking you to confirm your subscription to our Weblog. By pushing the “subscribe button”, you represent and warrant that you are over the age of 18 years old, are the owner/authorized user of that e-mail address, and are entitled to receive e-mails at that address. Our weblog will retain your name and e-mail address on its server, or the server of its web host. However, we won’t share any of this information with anyone except the Firm’s employees and contractors, except under certain extraordinary circumstances described on our Privacy Policy and (About The Consumer Finance Blog/About the Appellate Tracker Weblog) Page. NOTICE AND AGREEMENT REGARDING E-MAILS AND CALLS/TEXT MESSAGES TO LAND-LINE AND WIRELESS TELEPHONES: By providing your contact information and confirming your subscription in response to the initial e-mail that we send you, you agree to receive e-mail messages from Severson & Werson from time-to-time and understand and agree that such messages are or may be sent by means of automated dialing technology. If you have your email forwarded to other electronic media, including text messages and cellular telephone by way of VoIP, internet, social media, or otherwise, you agree to receive my messages in that way. This may result in charges to you. Your agreement and consent also extend to any other agents, affiliates, or entities to whom our communications are forwarded. You agree that you will notify Severson & Werson in writing if you revoke this agreement and that your revocation will not be effective until you notify Severson & Werson in writing. You understand and agree that you will afford Severson & Werson a reasonable time to unsubscribe you from the website, that the ability to do so depends on Severson & Werson’s press of business and access to the weblog, and that you may still receive one or more emails or communications from weblog until we are able to unsubscribe you.

In Forrest v. Genpact Services, LLC, --- F.Supp.2d ----, 2013 WL 4516479 (M.D.Pa. 2013), Judge Nealon denied a Motion to Dismiss that was brought on the basis that the TCPA plaintiff had not alleged that she actually answered the autodialed calls to her cellular telephone. Defendant argues that Plaintiff's TCPA claims must fail because she fails to allege that she… Read More

In Gager v. Dell Financial Services, LLC, --- F.3d ----, 2013 WL 4463305 (2013), the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held that the TCPA permits a consumer to revoke consent to be called by an autodialer on their cellphones. Dell's principal argument is that the TCPA's silence as to whether a consumer may revoke her prior express consent… Read More

In Richards v. Ernst & Young, LLP, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held in an employment case that the Defendant did not waive its right to compel arbitration by litigating the case during the years before the Supreme Court decided Concepcion.  The Plaintiff could not establish any prejudice from the delay in moving to compel -- one of… Read More

In Holmes v. Electronic Document Processing, Inc., 2013 WL 4456544 (N.D.Cal. 2013), Judge Koh found that an FDCPA/Rosenthal Act claim predicated on ‘sewer service’ of process was not protected by the litigation privilege. Next, Defendants argue that Plaintiff's claim under the Rosenthal Act is barred by California's litigation privilege, California Civil Code § 47(b). Mot. to Dismiss at 10. Section… Read More

In Caudillo v. Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC, 2013 WL 4102155 (S.D.Cal. 2103), Judge Gonzalez found that a debt collector’s failure to identify the original creditor a state-court debt collection complaint was deceptive. This Court and others have repeatedly held that a debt collection complaint that “fail[s] to identify ... the original creditor, is both deceptive and material under the least… Read More

In Holmes v. NCO Financial Services, Inc., --- Fed.Appx. ----, 2013 WL 4376585 (9th Cir. 2013), the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed the district court’s grant of summary judgment to a 4th-in-line debt collector who purportedly communicated information to the consumer reporting agencies without also reporting that it was disputed. The FDCPA provides that a debt collector… Read More

In Huizar v. Mandarich Law Group LLP, 2013 WL 4209050 (C.D.Cal. 2013), a law firm was sued arising out of collection on an unpaid debt for the purchase of an engagement ring.  The facts were as follows: Huizar purchased an engagement ring on credit from a now-defunct jewelry store. Compl. ¶ 21. Plaintiffs allege that defendant engaged in debt collection activities… Read More

In Do v. Hollins Law, P.C., 2013 WL 4013659 (N.D.Cal. 2013), a debt collection law firm filed an anti-SLAPP motion against the Plaintiff arising from the Plaintiff’s Rosenthal Act claim.  Judge White denied the anti-SLAPP motion, finding that the law firm’s activities were not protected by the litigation privilege and the law firm was, in fact, subject to the Rosenthal… Read More

In Alonso v. Blackstone Financial Group LLC, 2013 WL 3992122 (E.D.Cal. 2013), Magistrate Judge Boone found that payment of an otherwise legally owed obligation that was collected on by a means prohibited by the FDCPA was a “damage” under the FDCPA. Following the July 24, 2013 hearing, the parties were granted leave to file supplemental briefing regarding whether the $100… Read More

In People v. Persolve, (2013) 2013 DAR 10915, the Court of Appeal held that the litigation privilege is not a defense to a UCL action brought to enjoin business practices made unlawful by a statute more specific than Civil Code 47(b).  So, in this case, the People stated a good UCL claim against a debt collector for alleged unlawful business practices… Read More

In Castro v. Green Tree Servicing LLC, --- F.Supp.2d ----, 2013 WL 4105196 (S.D.N.Y. 2013), Judge Ramos found that including a GLB Privacy Notice with a collection letter was deceptive.  Judge Ramos also denied the defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment on Plaintiff’s TCPA claim.  Judge Ramos found questions of fact that an auto-dailer was used and that trapping a consumer’s… Read More

The Fair Debt Buying Practices Act of 2013 (Senate Bill 233) was signed by Governor Brown last month.  The Act will apply to debts sold or resold on or after Jan. 1, 2014. Purpose: The Act will regulate the activities of persons and entities that purchase delinquent or charged-off consumer debt by requiring specific documentation to be maintained by the industry. … Read More

In Smith v. Progressive Financial Services, Inc., 2013 WL 3995004 (D.Or. 2013), Judge McShane found that a student loan taken out to attend an aviation academy was still a ‘consumer’ debt under the FDCPA. Contrary to defendant's argument, “education” encompasses something broader than mere investment in pursuit of profit.   Brown v. Bd. of Ed. Of Topeka, Shawnee Cnty, Kan., 347… Read More

In Tait v. Asset Acceptance, LLC, 2013 WL 3811767 (C.D.Cal. 2013), Judge Olguin found an FDCPA claim barred by the Rooker-Feldman doctrine where the Plaintiff claimed that he was not served with underlying state court collection action. However, in entering default judgment against plaintiff, the state court expressly found that plaintiff was served with a copy of the summons and… Read More

In Lawton v. Cavalry Investments LLC, 2013 WL 3929707 (C.D.Cal. 2013), Judge Tucker excluded a law firm from the RFDCPA:  "Plaintiff alleges that Defendants violated § 1788.15(a) of the Rosenthal Act by “filing an illegal lawsuit” against Plaintiff. (Compl.¶ 16.)  Lawyers are expressly excluded from the Rosenthal Act's definition of “debt collector.” Cal. Civ.Code § 1788.2(c) (“The term ‘debt collector’… Read More

In Boon v. Professional Collection Consultants, --- F.Supp.2d ----, 2013 WL 3973084 (S.D.Cal. 2013), Judge Huff found that California’s litigation privilege barred an RFDCPA claim based on filing a collection lawsuit that, purportedly, was barred by the statute of limitations. Moreover, the Court concludes that California's litigation privilege bars Plaintiff's RFDCPA claims. The California litigation privilege applies to any publication… Read More

In Green v. U.S. Cash Advance Illinois, LLC, --- F.3d ----, 2013 WL 3880219 (7th Cir. 2013), the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit held that the FAA requires a district judge to appoint an arbitrator if when the arbitrator designated by the parties was unavailable, and the choice of arbitrator was no so important that the whole contract… Read More

In Jamison v. First Credit Services, Inc., 2013 WL 3872171 (Bkrtcy.N.D.Ill. 2013), Judge Kendall denied a TCPA-class action plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration of the Court’s denial of class certification because the Plaintiff was a convicted felon.  This case involved an alleged violation of the TCPA whereby FCS, on behalf of Honda, allegedly called Jamison's cellular telephone multiple times without Jamison's… Read More

In Craftwood II, Inc. v. v. Tomy Intern., Inc., 2013 WL 3756485 (C.D.Cal. 2013), Judge Carter rejected the use of the FRCP 68 device made to the individual class-representative to moot a TCPA class action after Genesis.  Defendant’s counsel sent Plaintiff a settlement offer. “In order to end this litigation now,” Tomy offered Plaintiff $1,500 for each faxed advertisement that… Read More

In Knutson v. Schwan's Home Service, Inc., 2013 WL 3746118 (S.D.Cal. 2013), Judge Curiel vacated and remanded for further consideration a Magistrate’ Judge’s order requiring a TCPA class-action plaintiff to produce an outbound dial list.   Schwan's operates a grocery delivery service. In addition to delivering groceries to their primary customers, Schwan's also made deliveries on behalf of NutriSystem, Inc. to… Read More

1 105 106 107 108 109 154