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.

15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(b)

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 Isler v. GE Emples. Fed. Credit Union, No. 3:18-cv-00867 (MPS), 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 176562 (D. Conn. Sep. 25, 2020), Judge Shea clarified when a Furnisher is and is not required to report an account as “disputed”. Plaintiff [*22]  also argues that GE Credit Union was negligent in failing at least to mark Plaintiff's account as disputed. Some courts have… Read More

In Holland v. Chase Bank United States, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 133642 (S.D.N.Y. July 28, 2020), Judge Engelmayer dismissed an FCRA claim against a Furnisher for absence of an “inaccuracy”, holding that Plaintiff’s claim that the debt was extinguished by the statute of limitations did not render the reporting of the debt inaccurate. Here, Holland asserts that Chase's furnishing of… Read More

In Chuluunbat v. Cavalry Portfolio Servs., LLC, No. 20 C 164, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 128931 (N.D. Ill. July 22, 2020), Judge Kocoras granted a furnisher’s motion to dismiss an FCRA claim. Given these letters, Cavalry argues that it was required to do nothing further than what it had already done to comply with its obligations under Section 1681s-2(b). Chuluunbat… Read More

In Hogue v Silver State Schools Credit Union, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed dismissal of an FCRA case due to lack of Article III standing. First, Hogue has not shown actual harm to his concrete interests. The district court found that “no third parties made an adverse credit decision as to [Hogue] based on this disputed… Read More

In Gadomski v. Patelco Credit Union, No. 2:17-cv-00695-TLN-AC, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 51070 (E.D. Cal. Mar. 23, 2020), Judge Nunley dismissed an FDCPA case because of the lack of damages. Plaintiff further contends that FRCA plaintiffs may prove a claim for actual damages by showing the unreasonable investigation of a credit dispute has resulted in emotional harm or humiliation, even… Read More

In Ku v. Trans, No. 2:18-CV-1714 JCM (BNW), 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 27474 (D. Nev. Feb. 18, 2020), Judge Mahan ruled against an FCRA Plaintiff alleging inaccurate reporting of a bankrupt account. Unsurprisingly, information in a consumer report is inaccurate if it is patently incorrect. Carvalho, 629 F.3d at 890. Even if information is "technically accurate," however, it may be… Read More

In Sullivan v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., No. 19-0234-WS-M, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 196114 (S.D. Ala. Nov. 12, 2019), Judge Steele allowed a “permissible purpose’ FCRA case past the pleadings stage despite the commercial nature of the transaction. Entangled with the defendant's [*16]  argument that it did not pull a "consumer report" is the argument that "FCRA does not apply to… Read More

In Cowley v. Equifax Info. Servs., No. 2:18-cv-02846-TLP-cgc, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 193522 (W.D. Tenn. Nov. 7, 2019, the District Court refused to allow a scheduled monthly payment issue case to proceed under the FCRA. The only evidence Plaintiff [*9]  brings to defeat UCFSC's motion for summary judgment is that the industry guideline, the CRRG, suggests that when a furnisher of… Read More

In Persinger v. Sw. Credit Sys., No. 1:19-cv-00853-RLY-MJD, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 188920, at *9 (S.D. Ind. Oct. 30, 2019), the Defendant was sued in a class action for accessing a consumer's credit report after the consumer's account had been discharged in bankruptcy; i.e. that the defendant had no permissible purpose in accessing the consumer report for account review purposes… Read More

In Nayab v. Capital One Bank USA, No. 17-55944, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 32575, at *24-32 (9th Cir. Oct. 31, 2019), the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit found that an FCRA Plaintiff met the Spokeo and Iqbal/Twombly standards for pleading a "Permissible Purpose" action under the FCRA. Nayab has pleaded facts sufficient to give rise to a reasonable… Read More

1 2 3 15