In Watkins v. Investment Retrievers, Inc., 2018 WL 558833, at *5–6 (E.D.Cal., 2018), the District Court dismissed a Rosenthal Act case based on the 15-day cure right that was exercised by the debt collector.
IRI’s second argument has merit. California Civil Code section 1788.30(d) shields from liability a debt collector who “within 15 days either after discovering a violation which is able to be cured, or after the receipt of a written notice of such violation,…notifies the debtor of the violation, and makes whatever adjustments or corrections are necessary to cure the violation with respect to the debtor.” Cal. Civ. Code § 1788.30(d). IRI’s letter, dated August 9, 2016, falls within section 1788.30(d)’s fifteen-day safe harbor. See ECF Nos. 8-3, 8-4. The letter states, in part, “our records show that you are not in possession of said vehicle and we apologize for any inadvertent confusion our previous letter may have caused.” ECF No. 8-4 at 1. The letter further states, “IRI is reaching out today to ensure that you have the correct information about your account and to correct our clerical error.” Id. . . IRI’s second letter falls within California Civil Code section 1788.30(d)’s fifteen-day period and corrects the first letter’s error. See ECF Nos. 8-3, 8-4. Thus, IRI appears to be entitled to section 1788.30(d)’s affirmative defense. Accordingly, IRI’s motion to dismiss plaintiff’s RFDCPA claim is GRANTED. That said, given the cursory manner in which the issue is briefed, and the possibility that plaintiff could amend to plead around the affirmative defense, the court will grant leave to amend.