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.

CCRAA -- Civil Code § 1785.25

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 Giovanni v. Bank of America, Nat. Ass'n  2012 WL 6599681 (N.D.Cal. 2012), Judge Beeler found that a FCRA Plaintiff failed to plead an inaccuracy in its reporting of a consumer's account that went through bankruptcy.   The facts were as follows: Plaintiff, Katheryn Giovanni currently resides in Chatham County, Georgia, but lived in California during the relevant times in the complaint.… Read More

In Mortimer v. Bank of America, N.A.  2012 WL 6218004 (N.D.Cal. 2012), Judge Spero addressed the interplay between bankrupt debt and credit reporting, finding that Plaintiff stated no FCRA or CCRAA claim.  The facts were as follows: Plaintiff Mark Mortimer (“Plaintiff”) brings this action against Defendant Bank of America, N.A., (“Defendant”) FN1 seeking redress for Defendant's alleged inaccurate reporting of his… Read More

In Grantham v. Bank of America, N.A., 2012 WL 5904729 (N.D.Cal. 2012), Judge James held that a Plaintiff stated a claim against a Bank for post-bankruptcy discharge credit reporting. In February 2011, Grantham sent a dispute letter to Experian requesting an investigation of the 1051 Account, disputing the alleged delinquencies reported in her credit report while her bankruptcy petition was… Read More

In Keshishian v. AFNI Inc., 2012 WL 5378819 (C.D.Cal. 2012), Judge Feess dismissed Plaintiff’s claims as improvidently pleaded.  Plaintiff Marine A. Keshishian alleges that Defendants Afni, Inc., Enhanced Recovery Company, LLC, Equable Ascent Financial, LLC (“Equable”), and Union Adjustment Company, Inc. are engaged in unfair debt collection practices. (Docket No. 3 [Compl.].) Specifically, Plaintiff alleges violations of the Federal Fair… Read More

In Ramirez v. Trans Union, LLC, --- F.Supp.2d ----, 2012 WL 4954120 (N.D.Cal. 2012), Judge Corely allowed a CCRAA claim to proceed against a CRA simultaneously with a FCRA claim, and found that FCRA’s prohibition against injunctive relief did not apply to CCRAA claims.  The District Court found no impediment to simultaneously maintaining CCRAA and FCRA claims. The only California… Read More

In King v. Bank of America, N.A., 2012 WL 4685993 (N.D.Cal. 2012), Judge Spero found a bankrupt Plaintiff’s FCRA claims to be outside of Walls v. Wells Fargo.  The facts were as follows: On July 21, 2010, the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of California granted Plaintiff a discharge of all dischargeable debts pur-suant to 11 U.S.C. §… Read More

In Harrold v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc., 2012 WL 4097708 (N.D.Cal. 2012), Judge Alsup found that FCRA still pre-empts other parts of the CCRAA that were not addressed by Gorman. The FCRA provides that “[n]o requirement or prohibition may be imposed under the laws of any State ... relating to the responsibilities of persons who furnish information to consumer reporting… Read More

In Mortimer v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, Nat. Ass'n, 2012 WL 3155563 (N.D.Cal. 2012), Judge Wilken addressed the impact of a now commonly-pleaded claim that a creditor continued to report late payments that were not made during a bankruptcy.  Judge Wilkens found that Plaintiffs failed to plead an inaccuracy – meaning that they actually made the payments during the bankruptcy… Read More

In Subhani v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, Nat. Ass'n, 2012 WL 1980416 (N.D.Cal. 2012), Judge Alsup found FCRA pre-emption of the UCL and Song-Beverly Act, except where such claims arose from Civil Code § 1785.25(a) under Gorman.  Judge Alsup explained: In the wake of Gorman, at least two courts in this district have held that claims brought under California's UCL predicated… Read More

The United States Supreme Court decided not to take a better look at the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit's holding in Gorman that FCRA did not pre-empt any remedy available under the Consumer Credit Reporting Agencies Act.  The cite is FIA Card Services, N.A. v. Gorman -- S.Ct. --, 2010 WL 1047883 (2010) Read More

1 2 3 4