Skip to Content (Press Enter)

Skip to Nav (Press Enter)

FDCPA (Fed & State)

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 Moten v. Transworld Sys., Inc., No. E078871, 2023 WL 8709724, at *7–9 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 18, 2023), the Court of Appeal in an unpublished decision addressed whether the trial court had interpreted the litigation privilege properly in an anti-SLAPP motion filed relative to a Rosenthal Act case. “Communications in judicial proceedings are privileged under section 47, subdivision (b)(2).… Read More

In VALERIE THOMAS, Plaintiff, v. LVNV FUNDING, LLC & RESURGENT CAPITAL SERVICES, L.P., Defendants., No. 21 CV 1948, 2023 WL 8544083, at *1 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 11, 2023), Judge Cummings was required to determine how the jury would be instructed on the FDCPA's $1,000 statutory penalty, having already found that Defendant violated the FDCPA.  Judge Cummings framed the issue as… Read More

In Brown v. MRS BPO, LLC, No. 1:20 CV 06762, 2023 WL 6198815, at *1 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 22, 2023), Judge Gettleman dismissed an FDCPA premised on a debt collector's use of a local area code to get debtors to answer calls. When Judith Leavell (“Leavell”) became delinquent with respect to certain debts, including a debt from a Mercury Credit… Read More

In Worley v. Simon Meyrowitz & Meyrowitz, P.C., No. 23-187-CV, 2023 WL 7528560, at *2 (2d Cir. Nov. 14, 2023), the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed dismissal of an FDCPA claim grounded in the theory that a debtor's collector's first communication with the debtor, in response to the debtor's e-mail, was the "initial communication" under 1692e(11) and… Read More

Today, the DFPI issued a new set of proposed "scope" regulations as to the applicability of the DCLA: On December 22, 2021, regulations implementing the application requirements under the DCLA became effective. On August 19, 2021, the Commissioner released an invitation to comment on an anticipated subsequent rulemaking related to the scope, annual report, and bond amount increase provisions of… Read More

In Nabozny v. Optio Sols. LLC, No. 22-1202, 2023 WL 6967048, at *3–6 (7th Cir. Oct. 23, 2023), the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit followed the 11th Circuit's decision in Hunstein.   Nabozny alleges in her complaint that Optio's violation of § 1692c(b) harmed her by “invading her privacy.” She elaborates a bit in her brief, arguing that because Optio… Read More

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 Altanie Hansen, Plaintiff, v. Santander Bank, N.A.; UAR Direct, LLC, d/b/a United Auto Recovery; 11th Hour Recovery, LLC, Defendants, No. 22-CV-3048 (SRN/TNL), 2023 WL 5533536, at *2–3 (D. Minn. Aug. 28, 2023), Judge Nelson found that a repossession company and the assignor were both subject to the FDCPA/1692a(6). To be bound by the provisions of the FDCPA, Defendants must… Read More

In Hagey v. Solar Serv. Experts, LLC, No. G061836, 2023 WL 5602365, at *3–4 (Cal. Ct. App. Aug. 30, 2023), the Court of Appeal held that a solar panel contract constituted a "consumer credit contract" under the Rosenthal FDCPA.  First, the Court of Appeal addressed the "due and owing" phrase in the Rosenthal Act's definition section. The question before us… Read More

In CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU, Plaintiff, v. CRAIG MANSETH, et al., Defendants. Additional Party Names: Darren Turco, Jacob Adamo, JTM Cap. Mgmt., LLC, UHG I LLC, UHG II LLC, UHG, LLC, United Debt Holding LLC, No. 22-CV-29-LJV, 2023 WL 5400235, at *8–9 (W.D.N.Y. Aug. 22, 2023), Judge Vilardo allowed the CFPB to proceed over objections from some defendants that they… Read More

The CFPB be issued an Advisory Opinion this Spring prohibiting a debt collector from suing or threatening to sue on a time-barred debt. Regulation F prohibits a debt collector from suing or threatening to sue to collect a timebarred debt. 14 As the CFPB explained in finalizing this prohibition, “a debt collector who sues or threatens to sue a consumer… Read More

In Brown v. Transworld Sys., Inc., No. 22-35244, 2023 WL 4536970, at *4–5 (9th Cir. July 14, 2023), the Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit affirmed its prior decision in Walls v. Wells Fargo. We held that Walls did not preclude his claim because “whether an unfair debt collection practice occurred does not depend on issuance or enforcement of… Read More

In Minser v. Collect Access, Nos. B318325, B321996, 2023 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 3029, at *13-18 (May 24, 2023), the Court of Appeal in an unpublished decision affirmed a judgment against a debt collector arising out of alleged improper service, holding that 1788.15's requirement that a debt collector "know" that service of process was not properly effected really means "constructive"… Read More

In In re Wells Fargo Forbearance Litig., No. 20-cv-06009-JD, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 76443, at *17-18 (N.D. Cal. May 2, 2023), Judge Donato found that state collection laws are preempted by the FCRA if they impact on credit reporting. Wells Fargo says that plaintiffs' claims under state consumer protection laws are preempted by the FCRA. Dkt. No. 172 at 14.… Read More

In Brayton v. Alltran Fin., LP, No. 1:21-cv-309-MOC-WCM, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72396, at *12-14 (W.D.N.C. Apr. 26, 2023), Judge Cogburn dismissed an FDCPA premised on an argument that calls showing the area code local to the debtor on the debtor's caller ID were deceptive. Plaintiff's claim under Section 1692e(10) is predicated on the theory that it was false or… Read More

In Ward v. NPAS, Inc., No. 21-6189, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 7100, at *12-16 (6th Cir. Mar. 24, 2023), the Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit affirmed summary judgment for a servicer on the basis of the FDCPA's servicer exemption. But the statute also expressly excludes "any person collecting or attempting to collect any debt owed or due or… Read More

In Ramirez v. Midland Credit Mgmt., No. 22-cv-02772-VC, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32517, at *1-5 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 27, 2023), Judge Chhabria allowed claims to proceed against a creditor for the act of calling a Plaintiff one time about a debt—and confirming on that same call that the Plaintiff was not the debtor. Capital One's motion to dismiss is denied.… Read More

In Weiner v. Ocwen Fin. Corp., No. 2:14-cv-02597-TLN-DB, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33107, at *7 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 27, 2023), Judge Nunley reconsidered Judge Englund's previous decertification order, finding that Judge Englund erred in his evaluation of whether the class representative must establish class-wide Art. III standing. In the Court's order granting Ocwen's motion for class decertification, the Court stated,… Read More

In Bassett v. Credit Bureau Servs., Inc., Nos. 21-2864, 22-1206, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 4428, at *7 (8th Cir. Feb. 24, 2023), the Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit reversed the district court's judgment for the class, finding that the Plaintiff had no Art. III Standing. The procedural background was as follows: The collectors sent Bassett (and her deceased… Read More

In Felberbaum v. Mandarich Law Grp., LLP, No. 22-431-cv, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 3370, at *1-4 (2d Cir. Feb. 13, 2023), the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed dismissal of an FDCPA claim based on allegations that the attorney did not have meaningful involvement in reviewing the debt. As relevant here, the FDCPA prohibits debt collectors from making… Read More

1 2 3 49