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 Toldi v. Hyundai Capital America, 2017 WL 736882, at *2–3 (D.Nev., 2017), Judge Gordon found that a TCPA plaintiff had standing to sue, and declined to stay the proceedings pending the outcome of the ACA Int'l decision. A vast number of cases have addressed whether a plaintiff receiving automated calls that violate the TCPA is the sort of intangible… Read More

In Freeman v. Wilshire Commercial Capital LLC, 2017 WL 714389, at *1 (E.D.Cal., 2017), Judge Shubb rejected the argument that a TCPA plaintiff did not have Article III standing. The Ninth Circuit's opinion in Van Patten v. Vertical Fitness Group, No. 14-55980, 2017 WL 460663, ––– F.3d –––– (9th Cir. 2017) is dispositive. The Van Patten court found that, in… Read More

In Bird v. Real Time Resolutions, Inc., 2017 WL 661375, at *8 (N.D.Cal., 2017), Judge Davila dismissed claims against a creditor and the creditor's law firm arising under the FDCPA. Here, Mr. Reyes is an attorney at the law firm Ericksen Arbuthnot, which was retained as defense counsel for Real Time in the lawsuits filed by Plaintiff. Nowhere in the… Read More

In Raczynski v. Daland Nissan, Inc. 2017 WL 603869, at *4–5 (Cal.App. 1 Dist., 2017), the Dealer got hit for $358,000 by a JAMS arbitrator.  The customer would not agree to a second arbitration under the RISC's clause allowing one if an award exceeded $100,000, and the trial court refused to order a second arbitration.  The Court of Appeal, in an… Read More

In Brinker v. Normandin's, 2017 WL 661372, at *2–3 (N.D.Cal., 2017), Judge Davila dismissed a TCPA case due to lack of Article III standing. Several courts have found that plaintiffs who received automated unsolicited calls have standing to bring TCPA claims. For instance, in Hewlett, the court found that “near daily” calls to the plaintiff's phone over the course of a… Read More

In Leyse v. Lifetime Entertainment Services, Inc., 2017 WL 659894, at *2 (C.A.2 (N.Y.), 2017), the Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court's denial of a 'say-so' class administration class. Leyse argues that the district court abused its discretion in denying, on ascertainability grounds, his motion to certify a class composed of “all persons to whose residential telephone lines [Lifetime] or… Read More

In Blatt v. Capital One Auto Finance, Inc., 2017 WL 660677, at *3–4 (M.D.Tenn., 2017), Judge Sharp granted summary judgment to an automobile finance company on a Plaintiff's EFTA claim. First, Blatt claims that his authorization over the phone does not equate to written authorization as contemplated in the EFTA. (Docket No. 38 at 4). Blatt acknowledges that the EFTA… Read More

In Duguid v. Facebook, Inc., 2017 WL 635117, at *5 (N.D.Cal., 2017), Judge Tygar dismissed a TCPA Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint attempting to plead use of an ATDS. Here, however, Plaintiff has again failed to allege the existence of such a system. At best, his allegations are conclusory, given that he merely asserts that Facebook “maintains a database of phone… Read More

 In Professional Collection Consultants v. Lauron, 2017 WL 634714 (Cal.App. 6 Dist., 2017), the Court of Appeal found that an Open Book Account claim sounded in contract, and applied the contract's choice of law clause. This appeal arises out of a credit card debt collection action involving two credit cards. Appellant Professional Collection Consultants (PCC), as an assignee of the original… Read More

In Williams v. Santander Consumer USA, Inc., 2017 WL 492968  (N.D. Ala. 2017), Judge Haikala described how the TCPA could confer jurisdiction on an out-of-state defendant for an out-of-state plaintiff. As the Court has explained, the Tennessee plaintiffs' claims arise from Santander's practice of calling borrowers' cell phones to collect debt. Because of the mobile nature of cell phones, Santander cannot predict… Read More

In In re: Moroni (Ford Motor Credit Company v. Moroni), 2017 WL 436148, at *11 (Bkrtcy.N.D.Ill., 2017), Judge Cassling found that a car dealer's principals could not use the bankruptcy laws to discharge their debt to their floorplan lender. Some courts have held that “a debtor did not have the necessary fraudulent intent when the debtor used money in violation… Read More

In Physicians Healthsource, Inc., v. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Boehringer Ingelheim Corporation, Medica, Inc.,  2017 WL 461002, at *4 (2d Cir. 2017), the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit put some meat on the bones of whether a fax offering a "free seminar" triggers the TCPA. Requiring plaintiffs to plead specific facts alleging that specific products or services would… Read More

In West Loop Chiropractic & Sports Injury Center, Ltd. et al., v. North American Bancard, LLC et al,  2017 WL 404896, at *1–2 (N.D.Ill., 2017), Judge Gilbert allowed TCPA discovery in a blast-fax case as to other faxes besides those that the Plaintiff received. The Court agrees with Plaintiffs that the information they seek is relevant to a decision concerning the… Read More

In Dominguez v. Yahoo!, Inc., 2017 WL 390267, at *20–22 (E.D.Pa., 2017), Judge Baylor granted summary judgment to Yahoo!. Having discussed the expert reports proffered by the Plaintiff, the Court will now consider whether, if the expert reports were admissible, the reports considered together with the experts' testimony at their depositions could establish a factual issue that the Yahoo system… Read More

In Scally v. Ditech Financial, LLC, 2017 WL 371996, at *5–6 (S.D.Cal., 2017), Judge Hayes dismissed an FDCPA class action arising out of collection of discharged debt. In this case, the first amended complaint alleges that Defendant sent letters to the Plaintiff attempting to collect on a discharged debt which contain various statements “falsely implying that the debt remained viable.”… Read More

In Del Valle v. Global Exchange Vacation Club, 2017 WL 433998, at *2–3 (C.D.Cal., 2017), Judge Carter declined to certify a TCPA class action because Plaintiff was not a member of the class she sought to certify.  But, Judge Carter opined on how Briseno's elimination of the ascertainability requirement interplays with whether a class action can be managed. Although Rule… Read More

In Van Patten v. Vertical Fitness Group, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that a plaintiff who alleges he received unconsented to text messages or telephone calls has standing to bring a TCPA claim against the sender. Unwanted messages invade privacy interests that are similar to interests protected at common law and to which Congress gave statutory protection.… Read More

Under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A), a bankruptcy discharge does not apply to any debt “for money, property, services, or an extension, renewal, or refinancing of credit, to the extent obtained by false pretenses, a false representation, or actual fraud.”  The United States Supreme Court recently determined that a false representation by a debtor is not required to satisfy the “actual… Read More

Financial institutions are vulnerable to financial loss and reputational damage caused by dishonest customers who use deposit accounts as part of a scheme to defraud others.  An all too common fact pattern involves the fraudster convincing his or her victim to deposit a check or wire funds into an account controlled by the wrongdoer.  The wrongdoer may mask the scheme… Read More

On October 11, 2016, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals issued its bombshell opinion in PHH Corp. v. CFPB, 839 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2016).  Media reports have primarily covered the Constitutional issue the decision resolved—that the structure of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) violates Article II’s delegation of all executive powers to the President.  But the decision also… Read More

1 58 59 60 61 62 154