U.S. Code
»
Title 15
» Chapter CHAPTER 41— CONSUMER CREDIT PROTECTION › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER I— CONSUMER CREDIT COST DISCLOSURE › Part Part B— Credit Transactions
15 U.S.C. § 1643
Liability of holder of credit card
(a) Limits on liability(1) A cardholder shall be liable for the unauthorized use of a credit card only if—(A) the card is an accepted credit card;(B) the liability is not in excess of $50;(C) the card issuer gives adequate notice to the cardholder of the potential liability;(D) the card issuer has provided the cardholder with a description of a means by which the card issuer may be notified of loss or theft of the card, which description may be provided on the face or reverse side of the statement required by section 1637(b) of this title or on a separate notice accompanying such statement;(E) the unauthorized use occurs before the card issuer has been notified that an unauthorized use of the credit card has occurred or may occur as the result of loss, theft, or otherwise; and(F) the card issuer has provided a method whereby the user of such card can be identified as the person authorized to use it.(2) For purposes of this section, a card issuer has been notified when such steps as may be reasonably required in the ordinary course of business to provide the card issuer with the pertinent information have been taken, whether or not any particular officer, employee, or agent of the card issuer does in fact receive such information.(b) Burden of proofIn any action by a card issuer to enforce liability for the use of a credit card, the burden of proof is upon the card issuer to show that the use was authorized or, if the use was unauthorized, then the burden of proof is upon the card issuer to show that the conditions of liability for the unauthorized use of a credit card, as set forth in subsection (a), have been met.
(c) Liability imposed by other laws or by agreement with issuerNothing in this section imposes liability upon a cardholder for the unauthorized use of a credit card in excess of his liability for such use under other applicable law or under any agreement with the card issuer.
(d) Exclusiveness of liabilityExcept as provided in this section, a cardholder incurs no liability from the unauthorized use of a credit card.
(Pub. L. 90–321, title I, § 133, as added Pub. L. 91–508, title V, § 502(a), Oct. 26, 1970, 84 Stat. 1126; amended Pub. L. 96–221, title VI, § 617, Mar. 31, 1980, 94 Stat. 182.)Editorial NotesAmendments1980—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 96–221 revised existing provisions into pars. (1) and (2) and, as so revised, in par. (1) made changes in structure and phraseology and revised means of notice and verification, and in par. (2) made changes in phraseology.
Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 1980 AmendmentAmendment by Pub. L. 96–221 effective on expiration of two years and six months after Mar. 31, 1980, with all regulations, forms, and clauses required to be prescribed to be promulgated at least one year prior to such effective date, and allowing any creditor to comply with any amendments, in accordance with the regulations, forms, and clauses prescribed by the Board prior to such effective date, see section 625 of Pub. L. 96–221, set out as a note under section 1602 of this title.
Effective DatePub. L. 91–508, title V, § 503(2), Oct. 26, 1970, 84 Stat. 1127, provided that: “Section 133 of such Act [this section] takes effect upon the expiration of 90 days after such date of enactment [Oct. 26, 1970].”
Notes of Decisions
William Krieger v. Bank of Am. NA, 890 F.3d 429 (3rd Cir. 2018).
· cites it 10× “§ 1666 ; and (2) TILA's unauthorized-use provision, which requires a credit card issuer to satisfy certain conditions before holding a cardholder liable for the unauthorized use of a credit card, including limiting the cardholder's liability to $50, 15 U.S.C. § 1643 . 1. The…”
DBI Architects, P.C. v. Am. Express Travel-Related Servs. Co., 388 F.3d 886 (D.C. Cir. 2004).
· cites it 6× “DBI sued AMEX in the Superior Court for the District of Columbia, alleging, in Count One of the complaint, that AMEX had violated TILA, 15 U.S.C. § 1643 , by refusing to repay DBI for the $133,254.”
Azur v. Chase Bank, USA, Nat'l Ass'n, 601 F.3d 212 (3rd Cir. 2010).
· cites it 3× “Azur filed suit against Chase Bank, USA, alleging violations of 15 U.S.C. §§ 1643 and 1666 of the Truth in Lending Act (TILA) and a common law negligence' claim after Azur’s personal assistant, Michele Vanek, misappropriated over $1 million from Azur through the fraudulent use…”
Transamerica Ins. Co. v. Stand. Oil Co., 325 N.W.2d 210 (N.D. 1982).
· cites it 10× “§ 1644 (1977) ], and to limit cardholder liability to 50 dollars for the unauthorized use of a credit card [ 15 U.S.C. § 1643 (1977) ]. The original Truth in Lending Act focused upon consumer transactions and exempted extensions of credit for business purposes.”
Stieger v. Chevy Chase Sav. Bank, FSB, 666 A.2d 479 (D.C. 1995).
· cites it 10× “The essential question on appeal is whether the disputed charges were incurred by an "unauthorized user" under the Act.”
Hilary Remijas v. Neiman Marcus Grp., LLC, 794 F.3d 688 (7th Cir. 2015).
“Under 15 U.S.C. § 1643 , a consumer’s liability for the unauthorized use of her credit card may not exceed $50 if she does not report the loss before the credit card is used.”
United States v. Maze, 414 U.S. 395 (1974).
· cites it 2× “…in Lending Act limited the cardholder's liability for the unauthorized use of his credit card to $50. 84 Stat. 1126 , 15 U. S. C. § 1643 (a).”
Fed. Trade Comm'n v. Wyndham Worldwide Corp., 10 F. Supp. 3d 602 (D.N.J. 2014).
· cites it 2× “at 19 (citing 15 U.S.C. § 1643 (a)(1))). The FTC alleges facts to the contrary that the Court must accept as true, drawing reasonable inferences in favor of the FTC, not Hotels and Resorts.”
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.