During these challenging times, Severson & Werson remains open and in full operation, consistent with the firm’s previously established contingency planning. While many of our attorneys and staff will be working remotely, as a firm, we continue in full operation. We are here to help, as always.

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.

For our auto finance colleagues who, like us, also work in the mortgage industry, we post here our summary of the recently-enacted 2009 Foreclosure Prevention Act.  2009 California Foreclosure Prevention Act For more information, contact Sunny S. Huo at (415) 677-5519 or ssh@severson.com or any of the Financial Services Group attorneys. Read More

In Jones v. Midland Funding, LLC, --- F.Supp.2d ----, 2009 WL 1385140 (D.Conn. 2009), District Judge Martinez ruled on whether a debt collector could offer the testimony of a renowned author of a treatise on the FDCPA that collection letters were consistent with industry standards.    The defendants offer Newburger as an expert “who will be called to provide an… Read More

In Wideman v. Monterey Financial Services, Inc., 2009 WL 1292830 (W.D.Pa. 2009), Magistrate Judge Hay held that an obtuse e-mail sent to a third party about a debtor could state a claim for third party disclosure violation under the FDCPA.  In Wideman, the Plaintiff claimed that the debt collector violated § 1692c(b) when it left a message with the plaintiff’s… Read More

In Galicia v. Country Coach, Inc. 2009 WL 1144224 (9th Cir. 2009), an unpublished opinion, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that deliver of an RV outside the state of California prevented application of the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act to the transaction.   The district court did not err in granting McMahon's summary judgment. The Galicias' Song-Beverly… Read More

In Piontek v. IC System, Inc. 2009 WL 1044596 (M.D.Pa. 2009), Judge Rambo held that a Plaintiff seeking emotional distress damages put at issue other lawsuits she had filed.    Here, Plaintiff's motivation for her actions giving rise to the suit, or for bringing the suit, are irrelevant to the issue of whether Defendants violated the FDCPA through their dealings… Read More

In Fairbanks v. Superior Court, 2009 WL 1035264 (2009), the California Supreme Court held that life insurance is neither a “good” nor a “service” subject to the CLRA.  The Supreme Court explained:    The Consumers Legal Remedies Act defines “goods” as “tangible chattels bought or leased for use primarily for personal, family, or household purposes, including certificates or coupons exchangeable for… Read More

In Hepler v. Washington Mut. Bank, F.A., 2009 WL 1045470 (C.D.Cal. 2009), Judge Snyder held that a mortgage company foreclosing on a home was not subject to either the FDCPA nor the Rosenthal Act, explaining:   To be held liable for violation of the FDCPA, a defendant must-as a threshold requirement-fall within the FDCPA's definition of “debt collector.” See Heintz… Read More

1 250 251 252 253 254 261