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

Waiver

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.

The California Legislature Sneaks Another One In: Pay Your Arbitration Fees on Time or You’re In Breach

by Scott J. Hyman |

The California Legislature enacted SB 708, effective January 1, 2020, as a further attack on arbitration in California.  SB 708 states, in part, that: In an employment or consumer arbitration that requires, either expressly or through application of state or federal law or the rules of the arbitration provider, that the drafting party pay certain fees and costs during the… Read More

District Court (Cal.) Sends Rosenthal Act Case to Arbitration Despite Creditor Having Filed Collection Action in State Court, But Preserves Debtor’s Right to Argue Waiver Before the Arbitrator

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Ngo v. PMGI Financial, et. al., DARRIN NGO, 2018 WL 6618316, at *7–9 (N.D.Cal., 2018), Judge Spero held that a creditor's filing a superior court collection action did not prevent sending the matter to arbitration, but the debtor remained free to assert waiver to the arbitrator. Ngo contends that Defendants waived their right to demand arbitration by filing a… Read More

Court of Appeal (Cal.) Says RISC Arb. Clause Means What It Says: An Arbitration Award in Excess of $100,000 Entitles Defendants to New Arbitration, Even if JAMS Has No “Appellate” Process and Parties Agreed to Use Different Arbitrator than Identified in RISC

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Raczynski v. Daland Nissan, Inc. 2017 WL 603869, at *4–5 (Cal.App. 1 Dist., 2017), the Dealer got hit for $358,000 by a JAMS arbitrator.  The customer would not agree to a second arbitration under the RISC's clause allowing one if an award exceeded $100,000, and the trial court refused to order a second arbitration.  The Court of Appeal, in an… Read More

District Court (Cal.) Enforces RISC Arb. Clause Post-Sanchez, Finding No Waiver; Says in Dicta that Broughton/Cruz Pre-empted

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Goodridge v. KDF Automotive Group, Inc., 2016 WL 142216, at *9-10 (Cal.App. 4 Dist., 2016) (unpublished), the Court of Appeal addressed Plaintiff's continued post-Sanchez fight against arbitration, finding that the standard form RISC was not unconscionable.  The Court of Appeal also found that that the Defendant's litigation conduct did not waive the right to assert it. We conclude Goodridge has not… Read More

District Court (Cal.) Enforces Arbitration Clause in FDCPA Case; Finds No Waiver by Filing State Court Collection Action

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Davis v. CACH, LLC, 2015 WL 913392 (N.D.Cal. 2015), Judge Freeman referred an FDCPA class action to arbitration, finding that the claim was within the scope of the Arbitration, that Arbitration was not inconsistent with the enforcement mechanisms of the FDCPA, and that the Defendant had not waived arbitration by filing a collection action in state court.  Judge Freeman… Read More

District Court (Cal.) Finds that FDCPA Class Action Defendant Could Enforce Arbitration Clause/Class Action Waiver Despite Having Already Sued in State Court on the Debt; No Waiver

by Scott J. Hyman |

In James v. Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC, 2015 WL 720195 (N.D.Cal. 2015), Judge Whyte found that a debt collector sued in an FDCPA class action could enforce the arbitration clause to send the case to arbitration despite the fact that the debt collector already had sued the the debtor in state court on the debt. James brought this class action… Read More

Court of Appeal (Cal.) Says Car Dealer Who Waived Right to Arbitrate Class Action Plaintiff’s Case Did Not Waive Right to Arbitrate Putative Classmembers’ Claims; Denial of Class Cert. Affirmed

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Barnes v. Bakersfield Dodge, Inc., 2014 WL 5392963 (Cal.App. 5 Dist. 2014), the Court of Appeal found in an unpublished decision that a previous order finding that a car dealer had waived its right to arbitrate a class-action plaintiffs’ claim did not mean that the car dealer had waived its right to arbitrate the claims of members of the… Read More

Severson chalks one up for the good guys: Court of Appeal (Cal.) Enforces Arbitration Clause in Standard Form RISC

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Gonzalez v. Metro Nissan of Redlands, 2013 WL 4858770 (Cal.App. 4 Dist. 2013), an unpublished decision, the Court of Appeal entered the Sanchez fray, and came down on the side of enforcing the arbitration clause in the LawPrinting RISC.   "Because we have no guidance from the Supreme Court, and because we cannot rely on the decisions of our sister courts,… Read More

District Court (Cal.) Rejects Plaintiff’s Strategy of Litigating State Court Rosenthal Act Claim to Obtain Waiver of Right to Arbitrate Federal Claim under Clause Containing a Class Action Waiver

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Gillette v. First Premier Bank, 2013 WL 3205827 (S.D.Cal. 2013), Plaintiff's counsel employed a strategy purportedly designed to secure a waiver of arbitration clause.  Plaintiff filed a small-value Rosenthal Act claim and settled it with the defendant.  However, Plaintiff also had filed a federal class action under Penal Code 632 -- California's call recording statute.  Defendant moved to compel arbitration of… Read More

1 2