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.

Judge Davila of the Northern District of California held that the file transfer service was not a "business" under the CCPA and grants defendant's motion to dismiss.  The analysis turns on whether or not defendant determine how or why to process consumer PI. Accellion moves to the dismiss Plaintiffs' CCPA claim on two grounds: (1) Accellion is not a “business”… Read More

On a motion to dismiss, Judge Cormac Carney in the Central District of California discusses whether plaintiff alleged sufficient facts to show that defendant lacked reasonable security procedures for a cause of action under the CCPA: MKS first argues that Plaintiff's CCPA claim must be dismissed because his “threadbare and conclusory” allegations “fail[ ] to allege any facts to support… Read More

Ruling on a motion for class certification, Judge Edward Chen of the Northern District of California, identifies the following relevant facts: Reuters also owns an online platform called CLEAR, which provides access to public and non-public information about American consumers, including Californians. FAC ¶¶ 1–2. Reuters collects surface and deep web data, including from social media, third-party data brokers, law… Read More

In  Garrabrants v. Erhart,  the Court of Appeal addressed privacy rules within the context of a whistleblower's use of purportedly private information of another employee to blow the whistle.  The facts were as follows: Charles Matthew Erhartwasan internal auditor at BofI Federal Bank (BofI) who “blew the whistle” on his employer. Erhart copied, transmitted to multiple regulatory authorities, and subsequently… Read More

In MARILYN HERNANDEZ, individually & on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. NOOM, INC., Defendant., No. 1:23-CV-00641-JRR, 2023 WL 8934019, at *1–2 (D. Md. Dec. 27, 2023), Judge Rubin found no Article III standing for a wiretapping claim based on a website's capture and recording of users’ electronic interactions with the website. Plaintiff Marilyn Hernandez, individually and on… Read More

In LISA STETTNER et al., Plaintiffs & Appellants, v. MERCEDES-BENZ FINANCIAL SERVICES USA, LLC et al., Defendants & Respondents. Additional Party Names: California Dep't of Tax & Fee Admin., Michele Zousmer, No. C094345, 2023 WL 8818219, at *1–2 (Cal. Ct. App. Nov. 29, 2023), the Court of Appeal held that a consumer cannot challenge imposition of a use-tax at lease-end… Read More

In DIANA PIMENTEL GARCIA, v. DEALERS AUTO AUCTION OF THE SOUTHWEST, LLC,  No. 1 CA-CV 23-0171, 2023 WL 8827231, at *1 (Ariz. Ct. App. Dec. 21, 2023), the Arizona Court of Appeals seemingly would depart from the analysis applied by the California Court of Appeal in the Quartz decision. The material facts are not in dispute. Auto Auction had a business… Read More

In RAFAL LOJEWSKI, SMITH GARCIA, DANIELLE GARCIA, MANUEL ACEVEDO, ISAMAR DELACRUZ, on behalf of themselves & all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. GROUP SOLAR USA, LLC, SOLAR MOSAIC, INC., SALAL CREDIT UNION, DANIEL YOMTOBIAN CORP D/B/A SOLAR PROGRAM, Defendants., No. 22 CIV. 10816 (PAE), 2023 WL 8850586, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 21, 2023), Plaintiff filed a class action in part… Read More

In Moten v. Transworld Sys., Inc., No. E078871, 2023 WL 8709724, at *7–9 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 18, 2023), the Court of Appeal in an unpublished decision addressed whether the trial court had interpreted the litigation privilege properly in an anti-SLAPP motion filed relative to a Rosenthal Act case. “Communications in judicial proceedings are privileged under section 47, subdivision (b)(2).… Read More

IN THE NATIONAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF HARTFORD & CONTINENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. VISUAL PAK COMPANY, INC. & LUIS SANCHEZ, Individually & on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Defendants-Appellants., 2023 IL App (1st) 221160, the Court of Appeal found no coverage for a TCPA claim brought against an insured. In this insurance coverage dispute, plaintiffs National Fire Insurance… Read More

In ELIZABETH BELYEA, et al., Plaintiffs, v. GREENSKY, INC., et al., No. 3:20-CV-01693-JSC, 2023 WL 8701311, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 15, 2023), Judge Corley dismissed a CLRA claim against a loan broker.  The facts were as follows: GreenSky is a “loan broker and sometimes-lender” that brokers loans for consumers “to pay for home improvement, home repair, and healthcare costs,”… Read More

In VALERIE THOMAS, Plaintiff, v. LVNV FUNDING, LLC & RESURGENT CAPITAL SERVICES, L.P., Defendants., No. 21 CV 1948, 2023 WL 8544083, at *1 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 11, 2023), Judge Cummings was required to determine how the jury would be instructed on the FDCPA's $1,000 statutory penalty, having already found that Defendant violated the FDCPA.  Judge Cummings framed the issue as… Read More

Today, the FTC issued its CARS Rule, to impose greater clarity obligations on the sellers of automobiles to the consuming public.  A copy of the FTC's press release is here: FTC’s CARS Rule_ Why a new rule to combat auto retail scams is great news for consumers and honest dealers   Read More

In BIN LU, Plaintiff, v. ENIGMA MPC, INC., et al., Defendants. Additional Party Names: Can Kisagun, Guy Zyskind, No. 23-CV-02152-LB, 2023 WL 8360052, at *4–6 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 1, 2023), Judge Beeler dismissed a CLRA claim premised on the argument that cryptocurrency was a "tangible good" under the CLRA.  The facts were as follows: The plaintiff resides in Singapore.  The… Read More

In NAOMI WEIZMAN, Plaintiff, v. TALKSPACE, INC., Defendant., No. 23-CV-00912-PCP, 2023 WL 8461173, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 6, 2023), Judge Pitts denied a class representative the ability to bring a claim for injunctive relief under the UCL.  The facts were as follows: Talkspace is an online mental health services platform. Weizman is a consumer who allegedly purchased therapy sessions… Read More

On December 5, 2023, Small Business Finance Association v. Clothilde Hewlett , Judge Klausner of the United States District Court for the Central District confirmed the propriety of the DFPI's regulation of small business lending.  The background of the DFPI's regulations is as follows: On September 30, 2018, California enacted Senate Bill ("SB") 1235, codified at California Financial Codes sections 22800-22805. The… Read More

In Brown v. MRS BPO, LLC, No. 1:20 CV 06762, 2023 WL 6198815, at *1 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 22, 2023), Judge Gettleman dismissed an FDCPA premised on a debt collector's use of a local area code to get debtors to answer calls. When Judith Leavell (“Leavell”) became delinquent with respect to certain debts, including a debt from a Mercury Credit… Read More

In an unpublished decision, BANK OF STOCKTON, Plaintiff & Respondent, v. GAYLE A. GRESHAM, Defendant & Appellant., No. H050099, 2023 WL 8252076, at *1–2 (Cal. Ct. App. Nov. 29, 2023), the Court of Appeal found the Bank's post-repossession letter to be compliant with Rees-Levering.  The facts were as follows: Gresham entered into a contract with Capital Volkswagen to buy a… Read More

In Worley v. Simon Meyrowitz & Meyrowitz, P.C., No. 23-187-CV, 2023 WL 7528560, at *2 (2d Cir. Nov. 14, 2023), the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed dismissal of an FDCPA claim grounded in the theory that a debtor's collector's first communication with the debtor, in response to the debtor's e-mail, was the "initial communication" under 1692e(11) and… Read More

1 2 3 154