Alkan v. Citimortgage: OC and California FDCPA

[Guest-1640]

Alkan v. Citimortgage, 336 F. Supp. 2d 1061 (N.D. California, 2006)

"Defendant argues that since the FDCPA does not apply to original creditors, such as itself, California is bootstrapping FDCPA liability onto entities engaged in debt collecting activities that Congress did not intend to regulate. As true as defendant's observation may be, it has provided no authority for why this may not be done. California has not somehow expanded the scope of federal liability under the FDCPA through Cal. Civ. Code § 1788.17. Instead, California simply incorporated by reference the text of certain federal provisions into the CFDCPA, rather than copying them verbatim into the California code. Any resulting liability, however, remains a state claim.

The real issue is whether California is permitted to impose these duties on the broad range of entities it defines as debt collectors. As discussed, nothing indicates that Congress intended to preempt the CFDCPA or to completely occupy the field of debt collection. Therefore, defendant has failed to show why California is not free to enact Cal. Civ. Code § 1788.17 as it is written, or as it is applied to defendant. Accordingly, plaintiff's claims under Cal. Civ. Code § 1788.17 [**10] are not dismissed."