During these challenging times, Severson & Werson remains open and in full operation, consistent with the firm’s previously established contingency planning. While many of our attorneys and staff will be working remotely, as a firm, we continue in full operation. We are here to help, as always.

Effective, Experienced, Exceptional.

Firm Profile

Inaccuracy

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 (Utah) Dismisses Plaintiff’s FCRA Claim Based on Reporting Bankrupt Account

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Layton v. Experian Info. Sols., Inc., No. 4:20-cv-00029-DN-PK, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 205221, at *2-3 (D. Utah Nov. 2, 2020), Judge Nuffer found no inaccuracy in the way that Discover was reporting the Plaintiff's bankrupt account. Layton sent a letter, certified, return receipt, to Experian disputing and requesting the above inaccurate information be removed as follows: "Immediately correct this… Read More

5th Cir. Says CRAs Failure to Include a Furnisher’s Positive Trade-Line in Consumer’s Report Did Not Give Rise to an FCRA Claim

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Hammer v. Equifax Info. Servs., No. 19-10199, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 28800 (5th Cir. Sep. 9, 2020), the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that no claim arose under the FCRA for failure to report a trade line in the consumer’s consumer report. Hammer alleges that Equifax violated the FCRA because it had favorable information about his… Read More

7th Cir. Says Reporting Multiple Debts Rather than Aggregating into Single Account Did Not Violate FCRA/FDCPA

by Scott J. Hyman |

  In Zablocki v. Merchs. Credit Guide Co., No. 19-2045, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 23737 (7th Cir. July 28, 2020), the Court of Appeals dismissed an FDCPA claim premised on a debt collectors failure to aggregate debts into a single account when reporting to the CRAs. Viewing Merchants's separate reporting of debts from the perspective of an unsophisticated but reasonable… Read More

District Court (N.Y.) Says Dispute Over Legal Status of Debt Between Furnisher and Consumer Did Not Create an “Inaccuracy” Under FCRA

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Holland v. Chase Bank United States, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 133642 (S.D.N.Y. July 28, 2020), Judge Engelmayer dismissed an FCRA claim against a Furnisher for absence of an “inaccuracy”, holding that Plaintiff’s claim that the debt was extinguished by the statute of limitations did not render the reporting of the debt inaccurate. Here, Holland asserts that Chase's furnishing of… Read More

District Court (Ill.) Says Furnisher Complied with the FCRA

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Chuluunbat v. Cavalry Portfolio Servs., LLC, No. 20 C 164, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 128931 (N.D. Ill. July 22, 2020), Judge Kocoras granted a furnisher’s motion to dismiss an FCRA claim. Given these letters, Cavalry argues that it was required to do nothing further than what it had already done to comply with its obligations under Section 1681s-2(b). Chuluunbat… Read More

District Court (Minn.) Says CRAs Don’t Need to Report Every Tradeline, and Consumer States No FCRA Claim When a CRA Does Not Show a Furnisher’s Tradeline on the Consumer Report

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Krosch v. Equifax Info. Servs., LLC, No. 19-CV-2784 (NEB/KMM), 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99150, at *5-9 (D. Minn. June 5, 2020), Judge Brasel held that a consumer stated no FCRA claim against a CRA due to the CRA's alleged failure not to report all furnishers' tradelines. Experian argues that the Complaint fails to allege either of these elements because… Read More

7th Cir. Joins Other Circuits Finding that CRA Obligations Do Not Extend to Being Debt Tribunals For Purposes of Determining Accuracy of a Tradeline

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Denan v. Trans Union LLC, No. 19-1519, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 14930 (7th Cir. May 11, 2020), the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit held that a CRA, under the guise of determining accuracy, was not obligated to adjudicate the consumer claims that the debt was not valid. Here, plaintiffs contend not only that Trans Union had a… Read More

District Court (Ga.) Rejects “Scheduled Monthly Payment” Inaccuracy Claim under FCRA

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Marshall v. Robins Fin. Credit Union, No. 5:19-CV-260 (MTT), 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22274 (M.D. Ga. Feb. 10, 2020), Judge Treadwell found against an FCRA Plaintiff in a ‘scheduled monthly payment’ claim. Robins argues that it did not furnish an inaccurate tradeline because the monthly payment amount of $524.00 is an accurate "historical term" for an account that it… Read More

District Court (Tenn.) Says Scheduled Monthly Payment Issue Did Not Give Rise to FCRA Claim

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Cowley v. Equifax Info. Servs., No. 2:18-cv-02846-TLP-cgc, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 193522 (W.D. Tenn. Nov. 7, 2019, the District Court refused to allow a scheduled monthly payment issue case to proceed under the FCRA. The only evidence Plaintiff [*9]  brings to defeat UCFSC's motion for summary judgment is that the industry guideline, the CRRG, suggests that when a furnisher of… Read More

1 2 3 … 7