Skip to Content (Press Enter)

Skip to Nav (Press Enter)

Effective, Experienced, Exceptional.

Firm Profile

Commerical Accounts

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.

District Court (La.) Finds Neither FDCPA Nor FCRA Cover Commercial Transactions

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Weiser v. Castille, No. 20-2043, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 173993, at *13-14 (E.D. La. Sep. 14, 2021), Judge Lemmon dismissed FDCPA and FCRA claims arising out of a Plaintiff's investment mobile home properties.   Additionally, an obligation arising from a commercial transaction, as opposed to a transaction "primarily for personal, family, or household purposes" is not a "debt" as defined… Read More

5th Cir. Says FCRA Does Not Cover Commercial Losses; Requires Something More to Prove Non-Economic Losses

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Bacharach v. Suntrust Mortgage, Incorporated, 2016 WL 3568059, at *1-2 (C.A.5 (La.), 2016), the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that the FCRA does not provide protection against commercial losses. Bacharach argues that due to SunTrust's alleged FCRA violations that resulted in the reporting of misinformation to various credit agencies, she was unable to purchase property at 2841… Read More

District Court (Ore.) Says FCRA Provides No Remedy for Commercial Losses

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Boydstun v. U.S. Bank National Association, N.D., 2016 WL 2736104, at *1 (D.Or., 2016), Judge Hernandez precluded Plaintiff's expert in a FCRA case from testifying about commercial losses because FCRA affords no remedy for them.  Plaintiff Robert Boydstun sought to introduce expert testimony about the economic damages he suffered after a failed attempt to secure financing for a forklift to be used… Read More

5th Cir. Holds that Private Eye’s Obtaining Information on Commercial Defendant Did Not Violate FCRA Because There Was No “Consumer” Nexus

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Hall v. Phenix Investigations, Inc., 2016 WL 1238602, at *2-3 (5th Cir. 2016), a Law Firm hired private eyes to obtain information on a litigant in a commercial lease dispute, which the Law Firm used against the litigant in the litigation.  The litigant sued, alleging that the information obtained by the private eye was a "consumer report" under FCRA, and litigation… Read More