Consumer Finance

In Spice v. Blatt, Hasenmiller, Liebsker & Moore LLC, 2018 WL 525723, at *8–9 (N.D.Ind., 2018), Judge Springmann certified an FDCPA class over defendant's objection that the $500,000 statutory cap would only result in de minimus recovery and, therefore, the class action device was not the superior method to adjudicate the dispute. The Defendant counters that a class action is… Read More

In Nissou-Rabban v. Capital One Bank (USA), N.A., 2018 WL 538962, at *6 (S.D.Cal., 2018), Judge Houston found that an FCRA plaintiff whose credit card account has passed through bankruptcy sufficiently alleged an "inaccuracy" under the FCRA and that such claim could proceed as a class action.  After allowing the Plaintiff to amend the Complaint to allege a class action, the… Read More

In Clarke v. West Palm Nissan, LLC., 2018 WL 521031, at *1–2 (S.D.Fla., 2018), Judge Rosenberg dismissed a TILA claim premised on a car dealers invocation of a right to cancel the transaction if and when financing could not be found. Defendant's Right to Cancel the Sale. Defendant's right to cancel appears in the sales contract, which is attached as… Read More

In Lindblom v. Santander Consumer USA Inc., 2018 WL 500347, at *6–7 (E.D.Cal., 2018), Magistrate Judge McAuliffe denied an automobile finance company's summary judgment in a class action complaining that its SpeedPay program violated the Rosenthal Act. Defendant does not contend that the Speedpay fee is written or otherwise expressly authorized in the Contract. Rather, Defendant concedes that Contract is… Read More

In Freeman v. Smartpay Leasing, LLC, 2018 WL 467390, at *1–2 (M.D.Fla., 2018), Judge Presnell deemed a defendant in default for failing to pay JAMS' fees when JAMS classified the arbitration as a "consumer" arbitration that required the defendant to bear almost all of the fees. The Arbitration Agreement gave Freeman the option of choosing between two arbitral fora—the American… Read More

In Scott v. Monterey Financial Services, LLC., 2018 WL 452359, at *2 (N.D.Ind., 2018), Judge Simon found a triable issue of fact sufficient to defeat summary judgment because, in part, of discrepancies in the defendant's call logs and business records. Scott attempts to cast doubt on the reliability of Monterey’s records of the call history by presenting evidence of the omission… Read More

In Pavlovich v. Account Discovery Systems, LLC, 2018 WL 395487, at *1 (S.D.Cal., 2018), Magistrate Crawford denied merits discovery because she already had ruled that class-discovery should proceed first. This Court issued a prior Order granting plaintiff’s Motion to Compel on November 28, 2017. [Doc. No. 63]. Therein, the Court approved discovery regarding DNF’s financial net worth because it is… Read More

In Smith v. SIMM Associates, Inc., 2018 WL 389089, at *4 (E.D.Wis., 2018), Judge Griesbach granted class certification in an FDCPA case. Defendant maintains that a class action is not the superior method of litigating the issues presented here because Plaintiff arbitrarily limited her purported class. Specifically, Defendant argues that, rather than propose a class that includes all potential consumers… Read More

In Red Barn Motors, Inc. v. NextGear Capital, Inc. f/k/a Dealer Services Corporation, 2018 WL 397231, at *1 (S.D.Ind., 2018), the District Court granted a Motion for Reconsideration Granting Class Certification, and decided to decertify a class action filed on behalf of all used car dealers entering into floorplan agreements with a floorplan lender. The facts were as follows: The Plaintiffs… Read More

In Harris v. Nissan-Infiniti, LT, 2018 WL 387397, at *1 (D.Nev., 2018), Judge Mahan dismissed an FCRA claim grounded in a furnisher's reporting of an automobile account after Chapter 7 discharge.  The facts were as follows: On or about June 16, 2011, plaintiff filed for Chapter 7 Bankruptcy (“bankruptcy”). (ECF No. 1 at 4). The bankruptcy court discharged plaintiff's obligations on… Read More

In Rhinehart v. Diversified Central, Inc., 2018 WL 372312, at *10 (N.D.Ala., 2018), Judge Hopkins dismissed a TCPA claim and found that an FDCPA claim failed to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. Note that “[c]ausing a telephone to ring or engaging any person in telephone conversation repeatedly or continuously with intent to annoy, abuse, or harass any… Read More

In Stissi v. Bag Fund, LLC, 2018 WL 354611, at *3–4 (C.D.Cal., 2018), Judge Otis Wright III dismissed an FDCPA case under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. In determining the applicability of the Rooker–Feldman doctrine, a district court must first decide whether the plaintiff is attempting a de-facto appeal of a state court judgment. Bell, 709 F.3d at 897. A de-facto appeal… Read More

In Verburg v. Weltman, Weinberg & Reis Co., L.P.A., 2018 WL 346834, at *2–3 (W.D.Mich., 2018), Judge Jonker granted an FDCPA Plaintiff's Motion in Limine to exclude a debt collector's reliance on the bona fide error defense. Lacking binding authority directly on point, the Court concludes that an affirmative defense based on mistake of state law is not available to… Read More

In Kristensen v. Credit Payment Services, Inc., 2018 WL 343758, at *3 (C.A.9 (Nev.), 2018), the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit found that 3 lenders and 2 marketing companies were not vicariously liable for an illegal text messaging campaign. Under these settled principles, the district court did not err in concluding that Kristensen failed to raise a genuine issue… Read More

In Williams v. Capital One Bank (USA), N.A., 2018 WL 317712, at *10 (N.D.Ala., 2018), the District Court found that the Rooker-Feldman doctrine did not bar an FCRA claim. Without question, the plaintiff in the present action has stated his belief that the default judgment entered against him in state court is meritless. Even so, his actual claim against Capital… Read More

In Skinner v. LVNV Funding, LLC., 2018 WL 319320, at *4 (N.D.Ill., 2018), Judge Aspen found that an FDCPA Plaintiff failed to make an evidentiary record that the Defendant's principal purpose was the collection of debts, post-Henson. The record lacks any evidence establishing the primary purpose of Defendant's business, debt collection or otherwise. Plaintiff presents a list of hundreds of collection… Read More

In Ronquillo-Griffin v. Transition Rental Screening Solutions, Inc., 2018 WL 325051, at *3–5 (S.D.Cal., 2018), the District Court denied production of the actual class's call recordings in a call recording class action because the content was private. Plaintiffs assert that the requested audio recordings “are highly relevant to several requirements for a class certification motion,” including numerosity, ascertainability, commonality, predominance, and manageability.… Read More

In Moser v. Health Insurance Innovations, Inc., 2018 WL 325112, at *8–9 (S.D.Cal., 2018), Judge Hayes found that a TCPA Plaintiff had adequately pleaded agency allegations against a host of defendants allegedly involved in health insurance telemarketing sales.  Judge Hayes then refused to strike a host of allegations made in the Complaint regarding other complaints and sister-state actions. Allegations concerning the… Read More

In Gilchrist v. First National Bank of Omaha, 2018 WL 317267, at *2–3 (W.D.Wash., 2018), Judge Pechman dismissed a federal TCPA claim because it was compulsory to a debt collection action filed in the state court. There is no question in the Court's mind that there is a logical relationship between (1) the credit agreement between the Bank and Plaintiff, (2)… Read More

In Young v. Northland Group, 2018 WL 306023, at *1–2 (E.D.Mo., 2018), Judge Autrey allowed an FDCPA claim to proceed based on the consumer's allegation that the debt collector did not immediately cease communications about the debt after the debtor notified the debt collector of representation by bankruptcy counsel. “The purpose of the FDCPA is to eliminate abusive debt collection practices… Read More