Skip to Content (Press Enter)

Skip to Nav (Press Enter)

CEB Prac. Guide § 2A.50 -- Liability -- Injunctive Relief

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 Faria v. PNC Bank N.A., et al., No. 223CV02023DADKJN, 2023 WL 6392752, at *4 (E.D. Cal. Sept. 30, 2023), Judge Drozd held: First, plaintiffs cannot obtain injunctive relief for violations of the FDCPA and Rosenthal Act. See Varnado v. Midland Funding LLC, 43 F. Supp. 3d 985, 992–93 (N.D. Cal. 2014) (finding that remedies under the FDCPA and Rosenthal… Read More

In Solberg v. Victim Services, Inc, dba Corrective Solutions, 2018 WL 6567072 (N.D.Cal., 2018), Judge Chhabria certified an FDCPA class, but declined to award injunctive relief under the UCL because the putative class was unlikely to be the subject of further collection activity. The plaintiffs also seek restitutionary and injunctive relief under the UCL. As an initial matter, the plaintiffs… Read More

In Goode v. Adler Wallach Associates, Inc., NO. 17-261, 2017 WL 3437900, at *3 (E.D.Tex., August 10, 2017), the District Court adopted the majority rule that the FDCPA does not provide injunctive relief as a remedy for private litigants. In light of these holdings, this Court declines to depart from the majority rule that the FDCPA does not provide equitable… Read More

In Bonanno v. New Penn Financial dba Shellpoint Mtg. Servicing, Case No: 5:17-cv-229-Oc-30PRL, 2017 WL 3219517 (M.D. Fla. July 28, 2017), the District Court found that the FDCPA affords no right to punitive damages. Shellpoint argues Bonanno's punitive damages and injunctive relief claims under the FDCPA should also be dismissed. The Court agrees. Damages exceeding the $1,000 cap in section… Read More

In Jacobson v. Persolve, LLC, No. 14-CV-00735-LHK, 2015 WL 3523696, at *10 (N.D. Cal. June 4, 2015), Judge Koh granted, in part, class certification in an FDCPA class action despite the fact that the FDCPA's $500,000 penalty cap would result in deminimus recover to the large number of individual class members. In opposition, Defendants do not dispute that individual class members… Read More

In Varnado v. Midland Funding LLC, --- F.Supp.2d ----, 2014 WL 1994622 (N.D.Cal. 2014), Judge Ryu found that the Plaintiff stated no claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress against a debt collector nor any claim for punitive damages.  Judge Ryu found, however, that a claim for intrustion on seclusion was stated.  Judge Ryu found that debt collectors do not… Read More

In Ajib v. Financial Assistance, Inc., 2013 WL 5553249 (E.D.Cal. 2013), Judge Boone addressed two claims commonly raised by in pro per plaintiffs:  that defendants violated the FTC Act and that an injunction to enjoin further FDCPA violations is warranted.  Judge Boone found neither claim viable. Plaintiff alleges that the actions of the defendants were in violation of the FTCA… Read More

In Freeman v. ABC Legal Services, Inc., 2012 WL 2589965 (N.D.Cal. 2012), Judge Chen held in consolidated proceedings alleging multiple claims of ‘sewer’ or ‘gutter’ service of process by a debt collector that the Plaintiffs lacked Article III standing to bring a UCL claim based on the FDCPA.  The defendant collected no money from the defendants, so restitution was not… Read More

In Durham v. Continental Cent. Credit, 2010 WL 2776088 (S.D.Cal. 2010), Judge Moskowitz disallowed injunctive relief under the FDCPA, explaining:   However, declaratory and injunctive relief are not available to private litigants suing under the FDCPA. The courts that have specifically addressed the issue of whether such relief is available to private plaintiffs in FDCPA actions uniformly hold that the… Read More

In Vitullo v. Mancini, 2010 WL 438248 (E.D.Va. 2010) Judge Elliott addressed the question of whether the FDCPA allows for injunctive and declaratory relief that has the effect of cancelling or extinguishing a debt as a remedy for violations of the Act. Judge Elliott held that the FDCPA does not afford such relief and granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss. … Read More

In Yasin v. Equifax Information Services, Inc. 2008 WL 2782704 (N.D.Cal. 2008), Judge Chesney conducted an analysis of FCRA and held that "equitable relief is not available as a remedy" under FCRA, citing Howard v. Blue Ridge Bank 371 F.Supp.2d 1139, 1145 (N.D.Cal.2005).  Judge Chesney also used an analogy to the FDCPA, finding in dicta that the FDCPA does not either. Read More