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 Smith v. Loanme, Inc., No. S260391, 2021 Cal. LEXIS 2248, at *2-3 (Apr. 1, 2021), the California Supreme Court found that Penal Code 632.7 requires two-party consent.  The summary is below: Under Penal Code section 632.7, subdivision (a) (hereinafter section 632.7(a)), it is a crime when a person “without the consent of all parties to a communication, intercepts or… Read More

In Fuller v. Biggs, No. 3:20-CV-2146-G, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 64672, at *14-17 (N.D. Tex. Apr. 2, 2021), Judge Fish allowed a personal injury claim to proceed against the lessor of a vehicle.  The facts were as follows: This suit arises out of a motor vehicle collision involving the plaintiffs and Scott Biggs ("Biggs").1Link to the text of the note On… Read More

In Tillman v. Mich. First Credit Union, & Sec. Auto Loans, No. 19-12860, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 66146, at *9 (E.D. Mich. Apr. 5, 2021), Judge Lawson granted summary judgment to an automobile lender on a challenge to the consumer report listing payment amounts post-bankruptcy discharge. The Sixth Circuit recently clarified the showing that must be made to sustain the… Read More

In Facebook, Inc. v. Duguid (No. 19-511) (2021), the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that The question before the Court is whether that definition encompasses equipment that can “store” and dial telephone numbers, even if the device does not “us[e] a random or sequential number generator.” It does not. To qualify as an “automatic telephone dialing system,” a device… Read More

In Willison v. Nelnet, Inc., No. 20-3538, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 8921 (6th Cir. Mar. 25, 2021), the Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit found that a student loan rehabilitation company was not subject to the FDCPA. Uncontradicted evidence clearly shows that Nelnet obtained Willison's loans for servicing after they were no longer in default. Willison participated in the… Read More

In Johnson v. Heuer Law Offices, No. 19-CV-1171-JPS-JPS, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56709 (E.D. Wis. Mar. 25, 2021), Judge Stadtmueller granted summary judgment to a debt collection law firm who was alleged not to have “meaningful involvement” in the sending of dunning letters.  The Judge Stadmueller held that although the Plaintiff clearly had emotional distress tied to the law firm’s… Read More

In In Stoutt v. Travis Credit Union, No. 2:20-cv-01280 WBS AC, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57392 (E.D. Cal. Mar. 24, 2021), Judge Schubb certified the Creasy TCPA issue for review by the 9th Circuit.  The facts were as follows: In this putative class action, plaintiff Shawntel Stoutt claims that defendant Travis Credit Union violated § 227(b)(1)(A)(iii) of the Telephone Consumer Protection… Read More

In Toyota Motor Credit Corp. v. Cte 1, Civil Action No. 19-19092 (CCC), 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 54385, at *3-7 (D.N.J. Mar. 23, 2021), Judge Cecchi dismissed dealer principals'/guarantors claims against their floorplan lender. WHEREAS TMCC argues that DeMaio's and Zeccardi's counterclaims must be dismissed on the basis that they lack standing to sue TMCC because they are bringing derivative… Read More

In Ewing v. Freedom Forever Ltd. Liab. Co., No. 20-cv-880-JLS (AHG), 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53561 (S.D. Cal. Mar. 22, 2021), Judge Sammartino dismissed part of a TCPA claim, but let the balance proceed.   Judge Sammartino held that some of the calls were barred by the statute of limitations, but still remained relevant. Defendants argue that "most of Plaintiff's… Read More

In Calhoun v. Google, LLC, Judge Koh allowed part of a claim against Google to proceed based Google Chrome's sharing of data with Google. Plaintiffs are users of Google’s Chrome browser who allege that they “chose not to ‘Sync’ their [Chrome] browsers with their Google accounts while browsing the web . . . from July 27, 2016 to the present.”… Read More

In Valentine v. Unifund CCR, Inc., 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44747, the court granted a motion to dismiss on the putative class action claim that the debt collector’s name being visible through a glassine window violated the FDCPA’s prohibition on using a debt collector’s name unless the name does not indicate it is in the debt collection business: As discussed,… Read More

The 3rd Circuit upheld a summary judgment ruling that dismissed a putative class action against a law firm: Candace Moyer brought a putative class action against Patenaude  &  Felix,  A.P.C.  under  the  Fair  Debt  Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) after Patenaude sent her a collection letter inviting her to “eliminate further collection action” by calling  Patenaude.  Moyer  claimed  that  this  invitation … Read More

In Gardiner v. Walmart Judge Koh held that the CCPA was not retroactive. The CCPA went into effect on January 1, 2020, and it does not contain an express retroactivity provision. See Cal. Civ. Code § 1798.198 (providing the CCPA “shall be operative January 1, 2020); see also Cal. Civ. Code § 3 (“[n]o part of [this Code] is retroactive, unless expressly so declared.”). Moreover,… Read More

In Iou Cent., Inc. v. Shore Appliance Connection Inc., No. 1:20-cv-2367-MLB, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 50674 (N.D. Ga. Mar. 18, 2021), Judge Brown found the FDCPA’s venue provision inapplicable to a dispute because the transaction was commercial and not consumer. Shore Defendants argue the applicable statute is the venue provision in [*6]  the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ("FDCPA"): 15 U.S.C.… Read More

In Fca Us Llc v. Santander Bank, N.A., No. 19 C 1516, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52353 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 17, 2021), Judge Lee estopped a dealership from asserting defenses against a Floorplan lender. Here, Santander asserts that it is entitled to the funds held by FCA under the following logical sequence: (1) New City entered into and defaulted under… Read More

In Finlay v. MyLife.com Inc., No. 20-cv-1105 (SRN/DTS), 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49154, at *16-18 (D. Minn. Mar. 16, 2021), Judge Nelson denied a Motion to Dismiss asserting that MyLife did not issue "consumer reports" under the FCRA. Plaintiff Brion Finlay is a resident of Minnesota and is currently searching for a new job. (Id. ¶¶ 1, 40.) He alleges… Read More

In Massaro v. Beyond Meat, Inc., No. 3:20-cv-00510-AJB-MSB, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46980, at *15-20 (S.D. Cal. Mar. 12, 2021), Judge Battaglia allowed a TCPA claim to proceed against PETA because their texts endorsing Beyond Meat constituted advertisements. Here, PETA appears to argue there is a blanket exemption for non-profit organizations, (Doc. No. 30-1 at 19-22), while Plaintiff contends PETA's… Read More

In In re Marriott Int'l Customer Sec. Breach Litig., No. 19-MD-2879, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48477, at *57-68 (D. Md. Mar. 15, 2021), the Court recommended that although the class representative's device could be examined for other malware, the device could not be examined for whether the representative had good cyber-security habits. Marriott's protocol seeks inadmissible evidence and that even… Read More

In Ct102 Llc v. Nextgear Capital, No. 20A-CC-1909, 2021 Ind. App. Unpub. LEXIS 223, at *3-5 (Ct. App. Mar. 19, 2021), the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's finding of damages sustained by a floorplan lender. The facts and procedure were as follows: On remand, the trial court held an evidentiary hearing on damages on October 6, 2020. Tr. Vol.… Read More

In Trim v. CMRE Fin. Servs., No. 20-cv-451-AJB-LL, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48060, at *1-3 (S.D. Cal. Mar. 12, 2021), Judge Battaglia denied a motion to dismiss an FCRA permissible purpose class action. Around May 4, 2018, Plaintiff incurred a financial obligation ("Debt") to a third party, Rady Children's Hospital San Diego ("Rady"). (Doc. No. 1 at 5.) On September… Read More

1 16 17 18 19 20 154