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.

Today, the Dept. of Treasury issued an analysis of the CFPB's Arbitration Rule, entitled Limiting Consumer Choice, Expanding Costly Litigation: An Analysis of the CFPB Arbitration Rule.  The Dept. of the Treasury concluded that In view of these defects, it is clear that the Rule does not satisfy the statutory prerequisites for banning the use of arbitration agreements under the… Read More

In Garcia v. Santander Consumer USA, Inc., 2017 WL 4325777, at *2–3 (E.D.Cal., 2017), Judge McGill ordered an auto finance case to arbitration, allowing the Arbitrator to determine the effect of McGill on the enforceability of the Arbitration clause. The arbitration provision stated in part, “Any claim or dispute is to be arbitrated by a single arbitrator on an individual basis and not… Read More

In McGill v. Citibank, 2017 WL 4382034, at *3 (Cal.App. 4 Dist., 2017) (unpublished), the Court of Appeal put its gloss on the Supreme Court's decision in McGill and what is left for the trial court to decide on remand. The Supreme Court concluded its opinion with the following paragraph: “Our invalidation of the arbitration provision insofar as it purports to waive McGill's… Read More

In Rodriguez v. A Better Way Wholesale Autos, Inc., 176 Conn.App. 392, 2017 WL 3977264 (Conn. App. April 17, 2017) , the Connecticut Court of Appeal held that adjudicating a dispute between the dealer and the finance company was properly within an Arbitrator’s jurisdiction in a consumer versus dealer arbitration. Here, A Better Way asserts that the parties' submission to… Read More

In Drayton v. Toyota Motor Credit Corporation, 2017 WL 1485027 (11th Cir. 2017), the Court of Appeals found that an arbitration clause could not be enforced. Lisa Drayton brought a putative class action claim against Toyota after she allegedly received automated telephone calls from Toyota attempting to collect a consumer debt. She alleged that the calls violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act… Read More

In McGill v. Citibank, N.A., 2017 WL 1279700, at *1 (Cal., 2017), the California Supreme Court addresses whether the Broughton/Cruz rule survives Concepcion.  See Kilgore v. KeyBank, Nat. Ass'n, --- F.3d ----, 2012 WL 718344 (9th Cir. 2012) ("the Broughton–Cruz rule does not survive Concepcion because the rule “prohibits outright the arbitration of a particular type of claim”—claims for broad public… Read More

In Raczynski v. Daland Nissan, Inc. 2017 WL 603869, at *4–5 (Cal.App. 1 Dist., 2017), the Dealer got hit for $358,000 by a JAMS arbitrator.  The customer would not agree to a second arbitration under the RISC's clause allowing one if an award exceeded $100,000, and the trial court refused to order a second arbitration.  The Court of Appeal, in an… Read More

In Eileen J. Dalton v. Santander Consumer Usa, Inc., 2016 WL 5266621, at *6 (N.M., 2016), the New Mexico Supreme Court rejected an unconscionability challenge to an arbitration clause in the standard form RISC. "The self-help and small claims carve-out provisions in the arbitration clause of the finance contracts are not substantively unconscionable. Therefore, Dalton did not satisfy her burden… Read More

Today, the CFPB issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking with regard to consumer arbitration, here:  CFPB_Arbitration_Agreements_Notice_of_Proposed_Rulemaking.  The CFPB's press release is here:  CFPB Press Release. The CFPB proposal is seeking comment on a proposal to prohibit companies from putting mandatory arbitration clauses in new contracts that prevent class action lawsuits. The proposal would open up the legal system to consumers… Read More

In Roberts v. AT&T Mobility, LLC, 2016 WL 1660049, at *1-4 (N.D.Cal., 2016), Judge Chen enforced AT&T's arbitration clause and class action waiver against Plaintiff's constitutional challenge. Plaintiffs essentially raise three arguments as to why arbitration should not be compelled: (1) because, if this Court were to compel arbitration, that would be state action that would violate their First Amendment rights –… Read More

In Goodridge v. KDF Automotive Group, Inc., 2016 WL 142216, at *9-10 (Cal.App. 4 Dist., 2016) (unpublished), the Court of Appeal addressed Plaintiff's continued post-Sanchez fight against arbitration, finding that the standard form RISC was not unconscionable.  The Court of Appeal also found that that the Defendant's litigation conduct did not waive the right to assert it. We conclude Goodridge has not… Read More

In Stevens-Bratton v. TruGreen, Inc., 2016 WL 155087, at *2 (W.D.Tenn., 2016), Judge Anderson denied a class certification motion on the basis that the Defendant responded to it with a Petition to Compel Arbitration, finding that the Arbitration Clause was not unconscionable.  The unconscionability analysis is not unusual, so much as the procedural posture. TruGreen is a national lawn care… Read More

In McCormick v. Citibank, NA, 2016 WL 107911, at *5 (W.D.N.Y., 2016), Judge Curtin ordered a TCPA case to arbitration, holding that the TCPA itself did not preclude arbitration. Because plaintiff asserts a federal statutory claim, the court must consider “whether Congress evinced an intention to preclude a waiver of judicial remedies for the statutory rights at issue.” . .… Read More

In Trabert v. Consumer Portfolio Services, Inc., 2015 WL 9271437, at *6-8 (Cal.App. 4 Dist. 2015) (unpublished), the Court of Appeal addressed for the third time whether an arbitration clause in a standard form RISC was unconscionable.  The Court of Appeal addressed the consumer's argument that Sanchez was distinguishable where cheaper cars purchased by poorer consumers was involved.  The Court of Appeal… Read More

In Natalini v. Import Motors, Inc., 2015 WL 8772839, at *2-3 (Cal.App. 1 Dist., 2015) (unpublished), the Court of Appeal was called upon to determine post-Sanchez whether a car dealer's petition to arbitrate should still be denied once the unconscionability analysis is removed.  The Court of Appeal said that there was an insufficient evidentiary basis upon which the existence of a valid arbitration clause… Read More

In DIRECTV, Inc. v. Imburgia, 2015 WL 8546242, at *1-2 (U.S.Cal.,2015), the Supreme Court of the United States once again affirmed its preference for arbitration, and killed the "poison-pill" argument that had gathered fancy amongst the plaintiff's bar. Petitioner DIRECTV, Inc., and its customers entered into a service agreement that included a binding arbitration provision with a class-arbitration waiver. It specified… Read More

In Johnson v. Santander Consumer USA Inc., 2015 WL 7567483, at *2-3 (D.Ariz., 2015), Judge Rayes ordered an FDCPA case to arbitration under a standard Arizona Automobile RISC. Both the RISC and the Amendment contain arbitration provisions that clearly and unmistakably delegate questions of arbitrability to the arbitrator. The RISC requires arbitration for any disputes “in contract, tort, statute or otherwise… Read More

In Vargas v. SAI Monrovia B, Inc., 2015 WL 7301781, at *5 (Cal.App. 2 Dist., 2015) (unpublished), the Court of Appeal found the RISC arb. clause not to be unconscionable.  What's interesting about the opinion is what to do with the class action allegations in granting the petition to arbitration.  The Court of Appeal found that the trial court properly… Read More

In Gillespie v. Svale Del Grande, Inc., 2015 WL 7307139, at *5-6 (Cal.App. 6 Dist., 2015) (unpublished), the Court of Appeal issued a lengthy opinion after remand from the Supreme Court in Sanchez that the Arbitration clause was enforceable.  The Court rejected the argument that neither the Arbitration Clause's choice of law or poison-pill provisions negated FAA pre-emption. The California Supreme Court disagreed… Read More

1 2 3 4 5 9