Skip to Content (Press Enter)

Skip to Nav (Press Enter)

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 Gadomski v. Equifax Information Services, Inc., 2018 WL 2096862, at *4–6 (E.D.Cal., 2018), the District Court found that no willful violation of the CRA could lie absent prior notice that the information was inaccurate or that the information came from an unreliable source.  Here, Defendant does not dispute that the information reported on Plaintiff’s credit report was inaccurate. (See ECF… Read More

In Evans v. Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC, 2018 WL 2035315, at *5–7 (C.A.7 (Ill.), 2018), the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit held that a debt collector violates the FDCPA when the debt collector receives an (untimely) dispute from a debtor in response to a 30-day validation letter and thereafter reports the account to a consumer reporting agency without reporting… Read More

In Florence v. Cenlar Federal Savings & Loan, 2018 WL 1145804, at *5–7 (D.Nev., 2018), Judge Navarro held that a mortgage debt was accurately reported through and after Chapter 13 bankruptcy proceedings. As a court stated in this District, “[t]he [c]ourt was unaware of any statute or case providing that discharge in bankruptcy makes a debt unreportable as opposed to uncollectable.”… Read More

In Stewart v. Equifax Information Systems, LLC, et.al., 2018 WL 1138286, at *13–14 (D.Kan., 2018), Judge Crabtree denied summary judgment to an FCRA plaintiff and granted summary judgment to a furnisher arising out of the furnisher's providing information about a credit card account that the Plaintiff's ex-husband took out without her consent.  The Court offers an interesting discussion of how… Read More

In Hogue v. Allied Collection Service, Inc., 2018 WL 771321, at *4–5 (D.Nev., 2018), the District Court granted summary judgment to an auto finance company who was sued for the way that it reported, and then reinvestigated, an automobile account after a debtor filed Chapter 13. Silver State argues that it is undisputed that plaintiff's auto account was delinquent on… Read More

In Nissou-Rabban v. Capital One Bank (USA), N.A., 2018 WL 538962, at *6 (S.D.Cal., 2018), Judge Houston found that an FCRA plaintiff whose credit card account has passed through bankruptcy sufficiently alleged an "inaccuracy" under the FCRA and that such claim could proceed as a class action.  After allowing the Plaintiff to amend the Complaint to allege a class action, the… Read More

In Harris v. Nissan-Infiniti, LT, 2018 WL 387397, at *1 (D.Nev., 2018), Judge Mahan dismissed an FCRA claim grounded in a furnisher's reporting of an automobile account after Chapter 7 discharge.  The facts were as follows: On or about June 16, 2011, plaintiff filed for Chapter 7 Bankruptcy (“bankruptcy”). (ECF No. 1 at 4). The bankruptcy court discharged plaintiff's obligations on… Read More

In Williams v. Capital One Bank (USA), N.A., 2018 WL 317712, at *10 (N.D.Ala., 2018), the District Court found that the Rooker-Feldman doctrine did not bar an FCRA claim. Without question, the plaintiff in the present action has stated his belief that the default judgment entered against him in state court is meritless. Even so, his actual claim against Capital… Read More

In Gilchrist v. First National Bank of Omaha, 2018 WL 317267, at *2–3 (W.D.Wash., 2018), Judge Pechman dismissed a federal TCPA claim because it was compulsory to a debt collection action filed in the state court. There is no question in the Court's mind that there is a logical relationship between (1) the credit agreement between the Bank and Plaintiff, (2)… Read More

In Gadomski v. Wells Fargo Bank N.A., 2018 WL 263903, at *3–4 (E.D.Cal., 2018), Judge Nunley rejected a consumer's claim that her FCRA claim was not subject to contractual arbitration because she'd had an intervening bankruptcy discharge. Plaintiff first argues the Agreement was rendered unenforceable because of the Bankruptcy Action. (ECF No. 15 at 5–6.) However, Plaintiff offers no cases… Read More

In Muehlenberg v. Experian Information Solutions, et. al., 2017 WL 6622837, at *3–4 (N.D.Cal., 2017), Judge Orrick dismissed an FCRA case premised on allegedly inaccurate reporting of an account as it passed through Chapter 13 bankruptcy proceedings. The Chase Defendants next contend that a review of the entire challenged report “in context” shows that Muehlenberg has not plausibly alleged any inaccuracy… Read More

In Fredrickson v. Cannon Federal Credit Union, 2017 WL 6558578, at *4 (D.N.M., 2017), Judge Brack granted summary judgment to a furnisher who allegedly failed to report a consumer's dispute as "disputed" because, Judge Brack said, the dispute was meritless. Furnishers can breach their § 1681s–2(b) duties if they fail to report the existence of a dispute because such an omission… Read More

In Dacumos v. Toyota Motor Credit Corporation, 2017 WL 6406137, at *4–5 (W.D.Wash., 2017), Judge Martinez found that dismissal of a state court collection action by itself did not vitiate the debt and require the creditor to report the balance as "0". Plaintiff contends that because TMCC dismissed the collection case against her in King County Superior Court, that dismissal acts… Read More

In Leones v. Rushmore Loan Management Services, LLC, 2017 WL 6343622, at *3 (S.D.Fla., 2017), Judge Dimitrouleas dismissed an FCRA class action because the information reported was not inaccurate in the first instance. Here, the reported information regarding Plaintiff's mortgage loan account—that it was 120 days or more delinquent and that foreclosure proceedings were initiated—was both accurate and complete. The Court… Read More

In Kunwar v. Capital One, N.A., 2017 WL 5991864, at *3–6 (N.D.Cal., 2017), Judge Koh allowed an FCRA claim past the pleading stage based on the argument that reporting a debt that was "cancelled" by issuance of a 1099-C rendered the reporting inaccurate. Plaintiff's complaint alleges that Defendant reported an unpaid balance in Plaintiff's account with Defendant to the CRAs,… Read More

In Paul Gugger, Plaintiff, v. USAA Federal Savings Bank, Defendant., 2017 WL 5552254, at *2–4 (S.D.Cal., 2017), the District Court denied a motion to dismiss a credit reporting complaint premised on the theory that a 1099-C discharged a debt, making reporting of the balance of the debt inaccurate. The Internal Revenue Code requires a creditor discharging indebtedness to file an “information… Read More

In Rodriquez v. Your First Choice, LLC d/b/a/ First Choice Payday Loan, 2017 WL 4855406, at *3 (D.Nev., 2017), Judge Gordon denied a creditor's motion for summary judgment based on a triable issue of fact as to whether the creditor had a permissible purpose to pull a consumer's credit report. Section 1681b(a) of FCRA states that in general, “any consumer… Read More

In Daugherty v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, 2017 WL 3172422, (4th Cir. July 24, 2017), the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the jury's finding of improper reinvestigation and willfulness against a furnisher, but found the punitive damages award to be constitutionally excessive. We must affirm the district court's judgment regarding Ocwen's liability for willful misconduct if there was sufficient… Read More

In Mamisay, et. al. v. TD Bank USA, et. al., 2017 WL 3387476, at *3–4 (N.D.Cal. Aug. 7, 2017), Judge Gonzalez-Rogers dismissed some claims but allowed some to proceed under the FCRA. As analyzed in the Court's prior ruling, the reporting of balances due, or past due, does not constitute an “actual inaccuracy” simply because a bankruptcy proceeding is pending. Biggs… Read More

1 2 3 4 5 6 9