Skip to Content (Press Enter)

Skip to Nav (Press Enter)

Effective, Experienced, Exceptional.

Firm Profile

CEB Prac. Guide § 2A.38 -- Communications with the Debtor -- Validation of the Debt -- Required Notices from the Debtor Collector -- Federal -- Language of the Validation Letter

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.

2d Cir. Says FDCPA’s Requirement to Disclose True Creditor in Private Label Credit Card Transaction Requires Disclosure of Issuing Bank, Not Private Label Retailer

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Bryan v. Credit Control, LLC, No. 19-244-cv, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 10519, at *7-9 (2d Cir. Apr. 3, 2020), the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit gave guidance on disclosure of "true creditor" in a credit card collection transaction for a credit card for a private label retailer. In arguing that Credit Control violated Section 1692g, Bryan insists… Read More

3rd Cir. Reject FDCPA Class Action Grounded in Debt Validation Given in 8-Point Font

by Scott J. Hyman |

  In Jewsevskyj v. Financial Recovery Services, Inc., --- Fed.Appx. ----2017 WL 2992499 (3rd Cir. July 14, 2017), the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit rejected an FDCPA class action that was based on the contention that FDCPA notices were given in too-small of a font. Here, although the format is compressed and the font is small, our inquiry focuses on whether… Read More

District Court (Cal.) Says FDCPA Requires Debt Collectors to Leave Mini-Miranda on V/M Messages

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Lyon v. Bergstrom Law, Ltd., 2016 WL 4161107, at *2–3 (E.D.Cal., 2016), Judge Drozd denied a motion to dismiss alleging FDCPA violations based on voicemail messages that did not disclose the FDCPA's mini-Miranda. Section 1692e(11) includes a non-exclusive list of conduct that constitutes a false or misleading representations. Section 1692e(11) provides the following conduct is a violation of the… Read More

11th Cir. Says Communications Between Debt Collector and Debtor’s Counsel are Subject to FDCPA, but Declines to Depart from “Least Sophisticated Consumer” Test to “Competent Lawyer” Standard; Says Strict Compliance with Terms of Debt Validation Notice are Required

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Bishop v. Ross Earle & Bonan, P.A., 2016 WL 1169064, at *3 (11th Cir. 2016), the Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit held that communications between a debt collector and debtor's counsel counsel are subject to the FDCPA, but still are subject to the least sophisticated consumer standard. We join the Third, Fourth, and Seventh Circuits in holding that… Read More

3d Circuit Says Debt Collector’s Inclusion of Language “please call us . . . if you feel you do not owe this amount” in its 30-day Validation Letter ‘Overshadowed’ the Debtor’s Right to Validate within 30-days

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Caprio v. Healthcare Revenue Recovery Group, LLC, --- F.3d ----, 2013 WL 765169 (3d Cir. 2013), the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held that a debt collector’s inclusion of the language “please call us toll free at 800–984–9115 or write us at the above address if you feel you do not owe this amount” in its 30-day… Read More

9th Circuit Explains Camacho — Says Validation Notice that Implies, but Does Not Require, Dispute to be in Writing Passes Muster under FDCPA

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Riggs v. Prober & Raphael, A Law Corp. --- F.3d ----, 2012 WL 2054640 (9th Cir. 2012), the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that a debt collector violates the FDCPA if his letter starting collection efforts states expressly that the debtor must dispute the debt in writing within 30 days or have the debt deemed valid. Camacho… Read More

District Court (Cal.) Finds Failure to Plead Either Absence of Meaningingful Involvement or a Camacho Validation Violation

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Riggs v. Prober & Raphael, 2010 WL 3238969 (N.D.Cal.), Judge Fogel held that, under Iqbal and Twombly, an FDCPA plaintiff failed to state a claim for lack of meaningful attorney involvement or for violating the Camacho  standard for debt validation warnings.  As to the former, Judge Fogel explained,   Plaintiff contends that her allegations that (1) Defendants sent the… Read More

Northern District Denies Plaintiff’s Summary Judgment Motion under Foti

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Reed v. Global Acceptance Credit Company, 2008 WL 3330165 (N.D.Cal. 2008), Judge Whyte rejected plaintiff's claim under Foti v. NCO Fin. Systems, Inc. 424 F.Supp.2d 643 (S.D.N.Y. 2006) and Hosseinzadeh v. M.R.S. Assocs, Inc. 337 F.Supp.2d 1104 (C.D.Cal. 2005) that a debt collector's failure to identify itself as a "debt collector" under 15 U.S.C. 1692e(11) violated that provision.  Here,… Read More