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.
Has Judge Sammartino in the U.S.D.C. for the Southern District of California seen “Who Framed Roger Rabbit”. In Barvie/Herman v. Bank of America, 2018 WL 4537723 (S.D.Cal., 2018), “Baby Herman” had some unauthorized charges debited from Baby Herman’s account, which didn’t go over none-too-well. Plaintiffs gave birth to a child (“Baby Herman”) and subsequently opened up a savings account with Defendant in… Read More
In Reddin v. Rash Curtis & Associates, 2016 WL 3743148, at *2-3 (E.D.Cal. 2016), the Court held that the FDCPA only protects third parties where the statute refers to something other than "consumers". Subsection 1692c(a)(1) generally prohibits a debt collector from communicating with a “consumer in connection with the collection of any debt...at any unusual time or place or a… Read More
In Masuda v. Citibank, N.A., --- F.Supp.2d ----, 2014 WL 1759580 (N.D.Cal. 2014), Judge Hamilton allowed a Rosenthal Act and Intrusion on Seclusion claim to proceed by a third party who was not the debtor (but was alleged to be). Citibank contends that the first cause of action fails to state a claim because Masuda has not alleged facts showing… Read More
In Lachi v. GE Capital Bank --- F.Supp.2d ----, 2014 WL 304436 (S.D.Cal. 2014), Judge Curiel found that a third party lacked standing to assert a violation of a cease and desist letter from the Doan Law Firm. The facts were as follows: Plaintiff alleges that “Defendants and each of them” claim Plaintiff owes them a debt and that, on November 9,… Read More
In Todd v. Collecto, Inc., --- F.3d ----, 2013 WL 5452071 (2013), the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit held that the FDCPA protects third person/non-debtors in only limited circumstances. The district court had dismissed Todd's complaint for failure to state a claim for relief, finding that Todd lacks standing to bring the FDCPA claims because he is not… Read More
In Montalvo v. Asset Acceptance, here, the District Court held that an FDCPA plaintiff lacked standing to assert the claim. Since the Plaintiff failed to list the claim in Plaintiff's bankruptcy schedules, the doctrine of judicial estoppel operated to prevent the Plaintiff from asserting the claim post-discharge. Read More
In O'Rourke v. Palisades Acquisition, LLC, here, the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit held that since the FDCPA protected only consumers (and not third parties), a state court pleading that arguably would have deceived the state court judge in a collection action was not actionable under the FDCPA. In O'Rourke, the debt collector sought but failed to collect… Read More
In Sclafani v. BC Services, here, Judge Huck held refused to allow an FDCPA harassment claim by a non-debtor to proceed against a debt collection agency. As to the mini-Miranda requirement, Judge Huck explained: To allow a person who knows that he does not owe a debt, and does not even know the debtor, to bring suit as a… Read More
A copy of the Article can be found here. Source: Consumer Financial Services Law Report. Copyright 2009 by LRP Publications, P.O. Box 24668, West Palm Beach, FL 33416-4668. All rights reserved. For more information on this or other products published by LRP Publications, please call 1-800-341-7874 or visit their website at: www.shoplrp.com Read More
Not all Plaintiffs are created equal under the FDCPA. In Bank v. Pentagroup Financial, LLC, 2009 WL 1606420 (E.D.N.Y. 2009), Judge Gleeson held that a non-debtor has no standing to pursue a claim under 15 USC 1692c (debt collector can only communicate with the debtor, his attorney, or designated representative about the debt), but did have standing to pursue a harasment claim under… Read More
