254 results for 'nos:"Consumer Credit - Other Suits"'.
J. Kronstadt grants final approval to a settlement that will bring an end to the consumer's class action accusing the debt collection company of sending him a notice of its intent to sell his repossessed vehicle without the required advanced notice and without several other disclosures, and then improperly demanding that the consumer pay the difference between the amount due under the sales contract and the amount received at the sale of the repossessed vehicle. Under the settlement agreement, the company will issue refund checks to class members who paid any amount of their deficiency balances and will waive the remaining deficiency balances of all class members. Class counsel is entitled to an award of $60,000 in fees.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Kronstadt, Filed On: November 21, 2023, Case #: 2:21cv6376, NOS: Consumer Credit - Other Suits, Categories: Debt Collection, Settlements, Class Action
J. Saylor denies a car buyer’s motion for partial summary judgment against those who sold her a dangerous car and then repossessed the car from her driveway when she fell behind on payments. While the repossession of the vehicle would have required that the buyer give her consent if no judicial process was undertaken to repossess the car, the agent who towed the car away to repossess it said he received a note beforehand that said the car’s lienholder had spoken to plaintiff and the car was ready to be picked up, so he interpreted that as her consent.
Court: USDC Massachusetts, Judge: Saylor, Filed On: November 16, 2023, Case #: 1:22cv10769, NOS: Consumer Credit - Other Suits, Categories: Debt Collection, Property, Vehicle
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Mullen grants Mercedes-Benz Financial Services' default judgment on its counterclaims against a car buyer for failure to make payment on a car he purchased, claiming a case of identity theft. The police report the buyer presented regarding his identity was found to be fraudulent, and it has been established that he did in fact sign a contract to purchase the vehicle and never made a payment. Mercedes-Benz repossessed the car and now the buyer owes it over $27,000 in car payments and legal fees.
Court: USDC Western District of North Carolina, Judge: Mullen, Filed On: November 16, 2023, Case #: 3:22cv345, NOS: Consumer Credit - Other Suits, Categories: Fraud, Attorney Fees, Contract
J. Shea grants the debt collector's motion to dismiss, ruling the consumer fails to state a plausible claim under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. The single collection notice did not contain any threatening language, was sent directly to the consumer in a typical fashion, and was not misleading or confusing in any way.
Court: USDC Connecticut, Judge: Shea, Filed On: November 14, 2023, Case #: 3:23cv221, NOS: Consumer Credit - Other Suits, Categories: Debt Collection, Consumer Law
J. Gallagher grants a merger mortgage company and a title firm’s motions to exclude expert testimony, then grants in part their motion to decertify the class and cross motion for summary judgment against a class of borrowers who sued for an illegal kickback scheme in violation of RESPA. The first witness was unable to state whether the class had obtained the lender’s policies, which does not address the issue, and the second witness lacked the knowledge to opine a RESPA compliance safeguard. Another hearing has been scheduled discuss additional questions answered for the motion to decertify the class and the cross motion of the mortgage and title firm’s summary judgment. Partial summary judgment in favor of the class borrowers is granted on the issue of the merger mortgage company can be held liable for the illegal kickback scheme.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Gallagher, Filed On: November 1, 2023, Case #: 1:20cv3489, NOS: Consumer Credit - Other Suits, Categories: Real Estate, Banking / Lending, Class Action
J. Gordon grants the debt collector’s motion to dismiss this suit alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. The debtor claims that the collector’s undated letter, which caused her to question its legitimacy, violated debt validation notice requirements, was harassing, misleading and unconscionable. The collector is protected by a Consumer Financial Protection Board regulatory safe harbor because it used a board model letter. The debtor has not alleged that information in the letter was inaccurate and has not plausibly alleged any violations of the Act.
Court: USDC Nevada, Judge: Gordon, Filed On: October 31, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv2150, NOS: Consumer Credit - Other Suits, Categories: Debt Collection, Consumer Law
J. Faber grants the debt collection agency's motion for summary judgment in the student's suit alleging violations of the West Virginia Consumer Credit and Protection Act by the manner in which it and two subcontractors attempted to collect on her defaulted student loans. A July 12, 2019, letter sent to her that included "fees and costs" associated with collecting the debt was not deceitful since it had the approval of the U.S. Department of Education.
Court: USDC Southern District of West Virginia, Judge: Faber, Filed On: October 31, 2023, Case #: 1:21cv21, NOS: Consumer Credit - Other Suits, Categories: Debt Collection, Business Practices, Class Action
J. Pappert sanctions a former Pennsylvania lawyer, who has now moved to Florida, for filing a baseless motion in this unfair debt collection case and then failing to travel from Florida to argue the case in court. A sanction of $1,000 to the court is appropriate in order to discourage the lawyer from repeating similar behavior in the future.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Judge: Pappert, Filed On: October 31, 2023, Case #: 2:18cv243, NOS: Consumer Credit - Other Suits, Categories: Debt Collection, Sanctions, Attorney Discipline
J. Boyle grants the customer of a women’s clothing company his motion to remand a case in which he and a class of customers sued the company for including 10 of the 16 digits on their credit card on their receipts, in violation of a credit transaction law. The company removed the suit to federal court, claiming that because the customers suffered injuries, the case must be tried there. However, the customers have not yet suffered concrete injuries because their credit information was not compromised despite the potential. Therefore, the lead customer is correct to request remand because the federal court does not have subject matter jurisdiction.
Court: USDC Eastern District of North Carolina, Judge: Boyle, Filed On: October 23, 2023, Case #: 5:23cv261, NOS: Consumer Credit - Other Suits, Categories: Consumer Law, Jurisdiction
J. Burroughs grants a man’s motion to amend his complaint against a company he alleges violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act and other laws by providing reports, to the fire department the man applied to work for, which included protected details of the man’s criminal record. The man sufficiently supports that false statements were made in the reports disclosed to the fire department.
Court: USDC Massachusetts, Judge: Burroughs, Filed On: October 20, 2023, Case #: 1:21cv11533, NOS: Consumer Credit - Other Suits, Categories: Public Record, Defamation
J. Peterson partially grants the debt collector's summary judgment motion in the consumer's lawsuit claiming it failed to properly handle her claim of identity theft after she informed it that a nearly $6,000 debt for unpaid rent at an apartment in Arizona did not belong to her, as she lives in Wisconsin. Disputed facts concerning whether the debt collector acted within the law in attempting to confirm proof of the consumer's address and otherwise investigate her claim need to go to a jury, but the consumer has adequately argued standing due to injuries she suffered in the form of denial of a student loan and lost time trying to fix her credit. Summary judgment is denied to both parties except for the consumer's claim for punitive damages, which is dismissed because she never responded to the debt collector's arguments about it in her brief.
Court: USDC Western District of Wisconsin, Judge: Peterson, Filed On: October 16, 2023, Case #: 3:22cv215, NOS: Consumer Credit - Other Suits, Categories: Debt Collection, Consumer Law
J. Oberto approves a class settlement of Fair Credit Reporting Act claims against a credit bureau. The agreement, which includes $1,000 payment to each class member and $1.1 million in attorney fees, is fair, adequate and reasonable.
Court: USDC Eastern District of California, Judge: Oberto, Filed On: October 16, 2023, Case #: 1:18cv1359, NOS: Consumer Credit - Other Suits, Categories: Settlements, Banking / Lending, Class Action
J. Coleman denies a group of credit holders’ motion for class certification. The group claims a credit bureau misled them about the accuracy and popularity of its “VantageScore 1.0” credit score system, with the prospective class representative specifically alleging that he was denied a car loan because the bureau did not tell him that his VantageScore differed significantly from the FICO score that the auto loan dealer used. However, the court finds that the prospective class representative’s testimony is inconsistent, and that he has not sufficiently shown the adequacy of his proposed class.
Court: USDC Northern District of Illinois, Judge: Coleman, Filed On: October 12, 2023, Case #: 1:14cv1850, NOS: Consumer Credit - Other Suits, Categories: Consumer Law, Banking / Lending, Class Action
J. Pepper grants the consumer's motion to remand to state court her lawsuit claiming the debt collector's dunning letter overstated the amount of her debt and made misleading statements about potential late charges and other fees. The consumer correctly argues that she lacks standing to bring her suit under federal rules because she has not suffered a concrete injury, so the court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction over her case. The consumer is awarded costs associated with filing her motion to remand, as the debt collector had no reasonably objective basis to remove the case in the first place.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Wisconsin, Judge: Pepper, Filed On: October 10, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv870, NOS: Consumer Credit - Other Suits, Categories: Debt Collection, Jurisdiction
J. Huff grants preliminary approval to a $5.69 million settlement in a class action accusing the credit reporting company of reselling inaccurate information with false notations stating that the consumer was deceased. In addition to the monetary award, defendant will also be required to improve its reporting practices to more clearly state that the data it is reporting is precisely the data it received from the nationwide credit reporting agencies and that the company cannot evaluate its content. Class members will each receive pro rata payments from the net settlement fund.
Court: USDC Southern District of California, Judge: Huff, Filed On: October 2, 2023, Case #: 3:22cv498, NOS: Consumer Credit - Other Suits, Categories: Settlements, Consumer Law, Class Action
J. Gonzalez preserves, in part, claims that allege three collection agencies violated state and federal debt collection practices through its attempts to collect a default judgment in connection with student loan debts first incurred in the early 1980s. The debtor claims they miscalculated the unpaid balance by using the state's 9% annual post-judgment interest rate instead of the required 8% rate under federal law. The court finds the claims are not preempted by the federal Higher Education Amendments Act.
Court: USDC Eastern District of New York, Judge: Gonzalez, Filed On: September 30, 2023, Case #: 1:22cv298, NOS: Consumer Credit - Other Suits, Categories: Debt Collection, Consumer Law
J. Boulware denies the credit reporting agency’s motion to dismiss this suit brought by the auto loan borrower who missed an auto-pay payment due to a clerical error with General Motors’ financial company. The agency did not conduct an investigation when the borrower reported the issue, but only forwarded an automated dispute to GM. “Many courts ... have concluded that where [an agency] is ... on notice that information received from a creditor may be suspect, it is unreasonable ... to simply verify the creditors’ information through the... [dispute verification] process without additional investigation.”
Court: USDC Nevada, Judge: Boulware, Filed On: September 29, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv1309, NOS: Consumer Credit - Other Suits, Categories: Debt Collection, Banking / Lending
J. Osteen denies an employment screening service’s motion for summary judgment following one claim of willful violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act brought by an apartment leasing agent applicant. Another applicant with the same first and last names and the same birthday happened to have a criminal record. The service attached this record to the first applicant’s file and consequently, the apartment leasing company did not hire him. Because there is a dispute of material fact as to whether the service followed its own policy in fact checking the criminal background checks it outsources to a different company, whether the service acted willfully or not cannot yet be determined.
Court: USDC Middle District of North Carolina, Judge: Osteen, Filed On: September 29, 2023, Case #: 1:19cv1077, NOS: Consumer Credit - Other Suits, Categories: Employment, Consumer Law, Negligence