(a)A person may bring an action against a claimant to establish that the person is a victim of identity theft in connection with the claimant’s claim against that person. If the claimant has brought an action to recover on its claim against the person, the person may file a cross-complaint to establish that the person is a victim of identity theft in connection with the claimant’s claim.
(b)A person shall establish that they are a victim of identity theft by a preponderance of the evidence.
(c)A person who proves that they are a victim of identity theft, as defined in Section 530.5 of the
Penal Code, as to a particular claim, shall be entitled to a judgment providing all of the following, as appropriate:
(1)A declaration that they are not obligated to the claimant on that claim.
(2)A declaration that any security interest or other interest the claimant had purportedly obtained in the victim’s property in connection with that claim is void and unenforceable.
(3)An injunction restraining the claimant from collecting or attempting to collect from the victim on that claim, from enforcing
or attempting to enforce any security interest or other interest in the victim’s property in connection with that claim, or from enforcing or executing on any judgment against the victim on that claim.
(4)If the victim has filed a cross-complaint against the claimant, the dismissal of any cause of action in the complaint filed by the claimant based on a claim which arose as a result of the identity theft.
(5)Actual damages, attorney’s fees, and costs, and any equitable relief that the court deems appropriate. In order to recover actual damages or attorney’s fees in an action or cross-complaint filed by a person alleging that they are a victim of identity theft, the person shall show that they provided written notice to the claimant that a situation of identity
theft might exist, including, upon written request of the claimant, a valid, signed Federal Trade Commission (FTC) identity theft report completed at least 30 days before filing the action, or within their cross-complaint pursuant to this section. In the alternative, the person may provide a valid copy of a police report or of a Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) investigative report, filed pursuant to Section 530.5 of the Penal Code,
at least 30 days before filing the action or within their cross-complaint pursuant to this section. For the purposes of this paragraph, if the person submits an FTC identity theft report, the claimant shall not also require a DMV or police report.
(6)A civil penalty, in addition to any other damages, of up to thirty thousand dollars ($30,000) if the victim establishes by clear and convincing evidence all of the following:
(A)That at least 30 days prior to filing an action or within the cross-complaint pursuant to this section, they provided written notice to the claimant at the address designated by the claimant for complaints related to credit reporting issues that a
situation of identity theft might exist and explaining the basis for that belief.
(B)That the claimant failed to diligently investigate the victim’s notification of a possible identity theft.
(C)That the claimant continued to pursue its claim against the victim after the claimant was presented with facts that were later held to entitle the victim to a judgment pursuant to this section.
Notes of Decisions
Satey v. JPMorgan Chase & Co., 521 F.3d 1087 (9th Cir. 2008).
· cites it 2× “” Cal. Civ.Code § 1798.93(a) and (c). “Claimant” means “a person who has or purports to have a claim for money or an interest in property in connection with a transaction procured through identity theft.”
Seungtae Kim v. Bmw Fin. Servs., 702 F. App'x 561 (9th Cir. 2017).
· cites it 3× “In light of the inherent difficulty in quantifying damages for injury to creditworthiness or reputation, the district court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that there was sufficient evidence to support the jury’s award of $250,000 for the FCRA claim.”
Seungtae Kim v. BMW Fin. Servs. NA, 142 F. Supp. 3d 935 (C.D. Cal. 2015).
· cites it 2× “) The additional argument in the RJMOL contends that there was insufficient evidence presented to the jury to support a conclusion that (1) Defendant failed to diligently investigate Plaintiff’s claim of identity theft; and, (2) that Defendant continued to pursue its claim…”
Sarukhanov v. J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., 691 F. App'x 383 (9th Cir. 2017).
· cites it 2× “Pursuant to Cal. Civ. Code § 1798.93 (a): (a) A person may bring an action against a claimant to establish that the person is a victim of identity theft in connection with the claimant’s claim against that person.”
Steven Won v. Fed. Nat'l Mortg. Ass'n, 714 F. App'x 810 (9th Cir. 2018).
· cites it 2× “A claim under California Civil Code § 1798.93 must be brought “within four years of the date the person who alleges that he or she is a victim of identity theft knew or, in the exercise of reasonable diligence, should have known of the existence of facts which would give rise to…”
Fayroyan-Mezhlumyan v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 202 Cal. App. 4th 195 (Cal. Ct. App. 2011).
“” (Civ. Code, § 1798.93, subd. (a).) Appellant alleged that someone forged her signature on two checks totaling $99,000 drawn on her home equity line of credit at Wells Fargo.”
Fred Peters v. Discover Bank, 649 F. App'x 405 (9th Cir. 2016).
“California Civil Code § 1798.93 provides that a victim of identify theft — defined by reference to California Penal Code §§ 530.”
Gonzalez v. Comenity Capital Bank (E.D. Cal. 2019).
· cites it 4× “”; and (vii) “Action to Establish Identity 13 Theft under California Civil Code, § 1798.93.”2 Doc. No.”
Kirby v. AT&T Corp. (S.D. Cal. 2022).
· cites it 4× “Claim I, California Identity Theft Law, Cal. Civ. Code § 1798.93 . 7 For their first claim for relief, Plaintiffs seek a remedy under the California Identity 8 Theft Law, Cal.”
Gonzalez v. Comenity Bank (E.D. Cal. 2019).
· cites it 3× “,” and (iv) 8 “Action to Establish Identity Theft under California Civil Code, § 1798.93.”2 Doc. No.”
Blackmon v. Ad Astra Recovery Servs., Inc. (S.D. Cal. 2021).
· cites it 3× “” CAL. CIV. CODE § 1798.93(a). The alleged identity theft victim may 17 recover actual damages or attorney’s fees from the claimant if she shows that she provided 18 written notice to the claimant at least 30 days prior to filing suit that a situation of identity 19 theft might…”
— Cal. Civil Code § 1798.93(a) — 3 cases
Satey v. JPMorgan Chase & Co., 521 F.3d 1087 (9th Cir. 2008).
“” Cal. Civ.Code § 1798.93(a) and (c). “Claimant” means “a person who has or purports to have a claim for money or an interest in property in connection with a transaction procured through identity theft.”
Blackmon v. Ad Astra Recovery Servs., Inc. (S.D. Cal. 2021).
“” CAL. CIV. CODE § 1798.93(a). The alleged identity theft victim may 17 recover actual damages or attorney’s fees from the claimant if she shows that she provided 18 written notice to the claimant at least 30 days prior to filing suit that a situation of identity 19 theft might…”
— Cal. Civil Code § 1798.93(c)(1) — 1 case
Kirby v. AT&T Corp. (S.D. Cal. 2022).
“Claim I, California Identity Theft Law, Cal. Civ. Code § 1798.93 . 7 For their first claim for relief, Plaintiffs seek a remedy under the California Identity 8 Theft Law, Cal.”
— Cal. Civil Code § 1798.93(c)(5) — 1 case
Blackmon v. Ad Astra Recovery Servs., Inc. (S.D. Cal. 2021).
“” CAL. CIV. CODE § 1798.93(a). The alleged identity theft victim may 17 recover actual damages or attorney’s fees from the claimant if she shows that she provided 18 written notice to the claimant at least 30 days prior to filing suit that a situation of identity 19 theft might…”
— Cal. Civil Code § 1798.93(c)(6) — 3 cases
Satey v. JPMorgan Chase & Co., 521 F.3d 1087 (9th Cir. 2008).
“” Cal. Civ.Code § 1798.93(a) and (c). “Claimant” means “a person who has or purports to have a claim for money or an interest in property in connection with a transaction procured through identity theft.”
Blackmon v. Ad Astra Recovery Servs., Inc. (S.D. Cal. 2021).
“” CAL. CIV. CODE § 1798.93(a). The alleged identity theft victim may 17 recover actual damages or attorney’s fees from the claimant if she shows that she provided 18 written notice to the claimant at least 30 days prior to filing suit that a situation of identity 19 theft might…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.