Skip to Content (Press Enter)

Skip to Nav (Press Enter)

Effective, Experienced, Exceptional.

Firm Profile

"Good Faith"

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.

District Court (Cal.) Declines to Allow a Good Faith Defense under the TCPA

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Berman v. Freedom Fin. Network, No. 18-cv-01060-YGR, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 150810, at *3 (N.D. Cal. Sep. 4, 2019), Judge Gonzalez-Rogers found no good faith defense to a TCPA claim. The alleged facts were as follows: In the instant action, plaintiff Daniel Berman, on behalf of himself and a putative class, alleges violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act… Read More

District Court (Cal.) Says How “Good Faith” Defense Interplays with the TCPA

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Perez v. Rash Curtis & Assocs., No. 16-cv-03396-YGR, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 58639, at *13-15 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 4, 2019), Judge Rogers addressed how the "good faith" defense interplays with the TCPA. With respect to plaintiff Perez, defendant may not assert that it acted in good faith in calling Perez and therefore is not liable under the TCPA to… Read More

District Court (Kan.) Says Husband Has Standing Under TCPA as Customary User of Wife’s Cell Phone, But Did Not Qualify Husband as “Residential Subscriber” Under TCPA’s DNC Rules

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Lee v. Loandepot.com, LLC, 2016 WL 4382786, at *5 (D.Kan., 2016), Judge Melgren held that the Husband, as a regular user of the wife's cell phone, had standing to sue under the TCPA. Moving on to the legal issue at hand, the 2015 FCC Order defines the term “called party” as the “subscriber, i.e., the consumer assigned the telephone… Read More

District Court (Cal.) Allows “Good Faith” Defense to Proceed in TCPA Action; Strikes “Failure to Mitigate” Defense where Plaintiff Alleges No Actual Damages

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Springer v. Fair Isaac Corp., 2015 WL 7188234, at *5 (E.D.Cal., 2015), the Court addressed what affirmative defenses may be pleaded in a TCPA action.  The Court allowed the affirmative defense of "good faith" to proceed. Defendant's third affirmative defense of reasonable and good faith states: "Defendant's actions were taken in good faith, in reliance upon information provided by its customers… Read More

District Court (N.C.) Allows “Good Faith” Defense to TCPA Claim; Adopts Magistrate’s Ruling that Caller Could Rely on Former Subscriber’s Consent

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Danehy v. Time Warner Cable Enterprise LLC, 2015 WL 5534285, at *2-3 (E.D.N.C.,2015), Judge Flanagan adopted a Magistrate's ruling on summary judgment in favor of a TCPA defendant. In his objections, plaintiff takes issue with the magistrate judge's determination that SkyCreek did not utilize an ATDS when making calls to plaintiff's telephone. The court does not reach the merits of… Read More

District Court (Cal.) Grants Summary Judgment to TCPA Third Party Debt Collector; Plaintiff Cannot Defeat MSJ By Arguing No Consent When Debt Collector Had Good Faith Basis to Believe that Plaintiff Gave Prior Express Consent to Original Creditor

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Chyba v. First Financial Asset Management, Inc., 2014 WL 1744136 (S.D.Cal. 2014), Judge Benitez found that even if Plaintiff created a triable issue of fact as to whether she gave prior express consent to be called on her cellular telephone, a third-party debt collector had a good faith basis to believe that Plaintiff had provided consent to the creditor… Read More

District Court (Cal.) Finds Triable Issue of Material Fact on Fact and Scope of TCPA Consent; Finds No “Good Faith” Exception to TCPA

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Olney v. Job.com, Inc., 2014 WL 1747674 (E.D.Cal. 2014), Judge O’Neill found trial issues of fact and denied summary judgment to a TCPA defendant who the Resume–Now's resume posting service, a service that is offered only to subscribing members and to whom Plaintiff had provided his cellular telphone number. Plaintiff misinterprets Satterfield. “The FCC appears to have intended in… Read More