Skip to Content (Press Enter)

Skip to Nav (Press Enter)

CEB Prac. Guide § 2A.21 -- Third Party Standing to Sue

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 Judge Autrey dismissed an FDCPA claim filed by a consumer's lawyer who received a 'dunning' letter from a debt collector attempting to ascertain his possible representation of a consumer. On July 27, 2020, Defendant attempted to collect the alleged consumer debt from the Consumer via mail by sending its initial collection letter to Plaintiff. Plaintiff received this initial collection letter… Read More

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 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 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: 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