California federal district court grants summary judgment for Simmonds & Narita’s law firm, servicer and debt buyer clients on claims brought under the FDCPA, Rosenthal Act and California’s Unfair Competition Law.
The plaintiff alleged that the law firm, servicer and debt buyer violated the FDCPA, Rosenthal Act and Section 17200 of the Unfair Competition Law by filing an application to renew a state court judgment in the name of the original judgment creditor. The U.S. District Court for the Central District of California granted summary judgment in favor of defendants. The court held the FDCPA and Rosenthal Act claims were barred by the doctrine of collateral estoppel because plaintiff had been served with the notice of renewal of the judgment but failed to challenge it in state court. The court held the plaintiff lacked standing under the UCL because the only money or property he lost as a result of the alleged conduct was $1.00 in mailing costs to send two letters. The court held such “trivial expense” was insufficient to confer standing under the UCL.