15 U.S.C. § 1693m

Civil liability

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 15 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Individual or class action for damages; amount of awardExcept as otherwise provided by this section and section 1693h of this title, any person who fails to comply with any provision of this subchapter with respect to any consumer, except for an error resolved in accordance with section 1693f of this title, is liable to such consumer in an amount equal to the sum of—(1) any actual damage sustained by such consumer as a result of such failure;(2)(A) in the case of an individual action, an amount not less than $100 nor greater than $1,000; or(B) in the case of a class action, such amount as the court may allow, except that (i) as to each member of the class no minimum recovery shall be applicable, and (ii) the total recovery under this subparagraph in any class action or series of class actions arising out of the same failure to comply by the same person shall not be more than the lesser of $500,000 or 1 per centum of the net worth of the defendant; and(3) in the case of any successful action to enforce the foregoing liability, the costs of the action, together with a reasonable attorney’s fee as determined by the court.(b) Factors determining amount of awardIn determining the amount of liability in any action under subsection (a), the court shall consider, among other relevant factors—(1) in any individual action under subsection (a)(2)(A), the frequency and persistence of noncompliance, the nature of such noncompliance, and the extent to which the noncompliance was intentional; or(2) in any class action under subsection (a)(2)(B), the frequency and persistence of noncompliance, the nature of such noncompliance, the resources of the defendant, the number of persons adversely affected, and the extent to which the noncompliance was intentional.(c) Unintentional violations; bona fide error

Except as provided in section 1693h of this title, a person may not be held liable in any action brought under this section for a violation of this subchapter if the person shows by a preponderance of evidence that the violation was not intentional and resulted from a bona fide error notwithstanding the maintenance of procedures reasonably adapted to avoid any such error.

(d) Good faith compliance with rule, regulation, or interpretationNo provision of this section or section 1693n 11 See References in Text note below. of this title imposing any liability shall apply to—(1) any act done or omitted in good faith in conformity with any rule, regulation, or interpretation thereof by the Bureau or the Board or in conformity with any interpretation or approval by an official or employee of the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection or the Federal Reserve System duly authorized by the Bureau or the Board to issue such interpretations or approvals under such procedures as the Bureau or the Board may prescribe therefor; or(2) any failure to make disclosure in proper form if a financial institution utilized an appropriate model clause issued by the Bureau or the Board,notwithstanding that after such act, omission, or failure has occurred, such rule, regulation, approval, or model clause is amended, rescinded, or determined by judicial or other authority to be invalid for any reason.(e) Notification to consumer prior to action; adjustment of consumer’s account

A person has no liability under this section for any failure to comply with any requirement under this subchapter if, prior to the institution of an action under this section, the person notifies the consumer concerned of the failure, complies with the requirements of this subchapter, and makes an appropriate adjustment to the consumer’s account and pays actual damages or, where applicable, damages in accordance with section 1693h of this title.

(f) Action in bad faith or for harassment; attorney’s fees

On a finding by the court that an unsuccessful action under this section was brought in bad faith or for purposes of harassment, the court shall award to the defendant attorney’s fees reasonable in relation to the work expended and costs.

(g) Jurisdiction of courts; time for maintenance of action

Without regard to the amount in controversy, any action under this section may be brought in any United States district court, or in any other court of competent jurisdiction, within one year from the date of the occurrence of the violation.

(Pub. L. 90–321, title IX, § 916, formerly § 915, as added Pub. L. 95–630, title XX, § 2001, Nov. 10, 1978, 92 Stat. 3737; renumbered § 916, Pub. L. 111–24, title IV, § 401(1), May 22, 2009, 123 Stat. 1751; amended Pub. L. 111–203, title X, § 1084(1), (4), July 21, 2010, 124 Stat. 2081, 2082.)Editorial NotesReferences in Text

Section 1693n of this title, referred to in subsec. (d), was in the original a reference to section 916 of Pub. L. 90–321, and was translated as meaning section 917 of Pub. L. 90–321 to reflect the probable intent of Congress and the renumbering of section 916 of Pub. L. 90–321 as section 917 by Pub. L. 111–24, title IV, § 401(1), May 22, 2009, 123 Stat. 1751.

Prior Provisions

A prior section 916 of Pub. L. 90–321 was renumbered section 917 and is classified to section 1693n of this title.

Amendments

2010—Pub. L. 111–203, § 1084(1), which directed the substitution of “Bureau” for “Board” wherever appearing in section, was not executed in subsec. (d), which was the only place such term appeared, to reflect the probable intent of Congress and the amendment by Pub. L. 111–203, § 1084(4). See below.

Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 111–203, § 1084(4), struck out “of Board or approval of duly authorized official or employee of Federal Reserve System” after “interpretation” in heading that had been supplied editorially and inserted “Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection or the” before “Federal Reserve System” in par. (1) and “Bureau or the” before “Board” wherever appearing.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 2010 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 111–203 effective on the designated transfer date, see section 1100H of Pub. L. 111–203, set out as a note under section 552a of Title 5, Government Organization and Employees.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 164 cases (60 in the last 5 years), 1982–2026 · leading case: Carol Tims v. LGE Cmty. Credit Union, 935 F.3d 1228 (11th Cir. 2019).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Carol Tims v. LGE Cmty. Credit Union, 935 F.3d 1228 (11th Cir. 2019). · cites it 3× “See 15 U.S.C. § 1693m. Congress further directed the CFPB to draft boilerplate language to help financial institutions "compl[y] with the disclosure requirements" for overdraft services.”

Marx v. Gen. Revenue Corp., 668 F.3d 1174 (10th Cir. 2011). · cites it 4× “§ 1875 (d)(2) (awarding "reasonable attorney's fees as part of the costs" to employers who successfully defend against suits that are "frivolous, vexatious, or brought in bad faith" by employees claiming to have been punished for jury service); 15 U.S.C. § 1693m(f) (awarding…”

Daye v. Cmty. Fin. Serv. Centers, LLC, 233 F. Supp. 3d 946 (D.N.M. 2017). · cites it 8× “See Supportive MSJ Brief at 19-20 (quoting 15 U.S.C.A § 1693m). Based on these criteria, Daye says, the Court should award her one percent of Speedy Loan’s “mean average” net worth during 2013 and 2014.”

Marek v. Chesny, 473 U.S. 1 (1985). · cites it 2× “3737 , 15 U. S. C. §§ 1693m(a) and (f). 19. Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act, 82 Stat.”

Buechler v. Your Wine & Spirit Shoppe, Inc., 846 F. Supp. 2d 406 (D. Maryland 2012). · cites it 6× “15 U.S.C. § 1693m(a) (emphasis added). Congress chose the broader word "person” rather than the narrower term "financial institution” to define who could be held liable and employed the same terminology in providing protection from liability.”

David Hughes v. Kore of Indiana Enter. Inc, 731 F.3d 672 (7th Cir. 2013). · cites it 3× “” 15 U.S.C. § 1693m(a)(2)(A). The alternative to a class action — individual lawsuits most or even all of which would be seeking damages of only $100 — would therefore not be realistic.”

Pinkston-Poling v. Advia Credit Union, 227 F. Supp. 3d 848 (W.D. Mich. 2016). · cites it 3× “Conclusion For the foregoing reasons, the Court will deny Advia’s motion to dismiss and allow Plaintiffs breach of contract and EFTA claims to proceed.”

Wike v. Vertrue, Inc., 566 F.3d 590 (6th Cir. 2009). · cites it 3× “See 15 U.S.C. § 1693m(a)(2)(A). But even assuming (without deciding) that the statute permits a plaintiff who has suffered no injury to seek statutory damages, that does not demonstrate that a consumer's claim accrues when a transfer is initiated.”

Friedman v. 24 Hour Fitness USA, Inc., 580 F. Supp. 2d 985 (C.D. Cal. 2008). · cites it 4× “¶ 115; 15 U.S.C. § 1693m (“Except as otherwise provided by this section and section 1693h, any person who fails to comply .”

Terry Johnson v. West Suburban Bank Tele-Cash Inc. Cnty. Bank of Rehoboth Beach, Delaware Tele-Cash Inc. Cnty. Bank of Rehoboth Beach, Delaware, 225 F.3d 366 (3rd Cir. 2000). · cites it 2× “The District Court inferred that Congress’s use of identical language bespoke identical goals, and that Congress was seeking to encourage the certification of class actions under the EFTA as it had under the TILA. Because the Court had concluded that this goal created an…”

Nancy R. Murray, Plaintiff-Petitioner v. Gmac Mortg. Corp., Doing Bus. as ditech.com, Defendant-Respondent, 434 F.3d 948 (7th Cir. 2006). “For example, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act says that total recovery may not exceed “the lesser of $500,000 or 1 per centum of the net worth of the debt collector”. 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(a)(2)(B)(ii).”

Stearns v. Ticketmaster Corp., 655 F.3d 1013 (9th Cir. 2011). “See 15 U.S.C. § 1693m(a)(2)(A); see also id. § 1693m(a)(2)(B) (class actions).”

Show all 164 citing cases →

— 15 U.S.C. § 1693m(a) — 37 cases

Marek v. Chesny, 473 U.S. 1 (1985). “3737 , 15 U. S. C. §§ 1693m(a) and (f). 19. Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act, 82 Stat.”

Terry Johnson v. West Suburban Bank Tele-Cash Inc. Cnty. Bank of Rehoboth Beach, Delaware Tele-Cash Inc. Cnty. Bank of Rehoboth Beach, Delaware, 225 F.3d 366 (3rd Cir. 2000). “The District Court inferred that Congress’s use of identical language bespoke identical goals, and that Congress was seeking to encourage the certification of class actions under the EFTA as it had under the TILA. Because the Court had concluded that this goal created an…”

Noble v. Am. Nat'l Prop., 297 F. Supp. 3d 998 (2018).

Ironforge. Com v. Paychex, Inc., 747 F. Supp. 2d 384 (W.D.N.Y. 2010).

Peters v. Riggs Nat'l Bank, N.A., 942 A.2d 1163 (D.C. 2008).

— 15 U.S.C. § 1693m(a)(1) — 5 cases

Voeks v. Pilot Travel Centers, 560 F. Supp. 2d 718 (E.D. Wis. 2008).

Carline Merisier v. Bank of Am., N.A., 688 F.3d 1203 (11th Cir. 2012).

Smith v. Bank of Hawaii (D. Haw. 2019).

Daugherty v. The Fed. Sav. Bank (C.D. Ill. 2021).

Brown v. Stored Value Cards, Inc. (D. Or. 2021).

— 15 U.S.C. § 1693m(a)(1)(B) — 2 cases

Murray, Nancy R. v. GMAC Mortg. Corp (7th Cir. 2006).

— 15 U.S.C. § 1693m(a)(2) — 1 case

Ballard v. Branch Banking & Trust Co., 284 F.R.D. 9 (D.D.C. 2012).

— 15 U.S.C. § 1693m(a)(2)(A) — 12 cases

Stearns v. Ticketmaster Corp., 655 F.3d 1013 (9th Cir. 2011). “See 15 U.S.C. § 1693m(a)(2)(A); see also id. § 1693m(a)(2)(B) (class actions).”

David Hughes v. Kore of Indiana Enter. Inc, 731 F.3d 672 (7th Cir. 2013). “” 15 U.S.C. § 1693m(a)(2)(A). The alternative to a class action — individual lawsuits most or even all of which would be seeking damages of only $100 — would therefore not be realistic.”

Wahl v. Midland Credit Mgmt., Inc., 243 F.R.D. 291 (N.D. Ill. 2007).

Wike v. Vertrue, Inc., 566 F.3d 590 (6th Cir. 2009). “See 15 U.S.C. § 1693m(a)(2)(A). But even assuming (without deciding) that the statute permits a plaintiff who has suffered no injury to seek statutory damages, that does not demonstrate that a consumer's claim accrues when a transfer is initiated.”

Andrew Gale v. Hyde Park Bank, 384 F.3d 451 (7th Cir. 2004).

— 15 U.S.C. § 1693m(a)(2)(B) — 11 cases

Brown v. Bank of Am., N.A., 457 F. Supp. 2d 82 (D. Mass. 2006).

In re Trans Union Corp. Privacy Litig., 211 F.R.D. 328 (N.D. Ill. 2002).

Friedman v. 24 Hour Fitness USA, Inc., 580 F. Supp. 2d 985 (C.D. Cal. 2008). “¶ 115; 15 U.S.C. § 1693m (“Except as otherwise provided by this section and section 1693h, any person who fails to comply .”

Mace v. Van Ru Credit Corp., 109 F.3d 338 (7th Cir. 1997).

— 15 U.S.C. § 1693m(a)(2)(B)(i) — 1 case

Ballard v. Branch Banking & Trust Co., 284 F.R.D. 9 (D.D.C. 2012).

— 15 U.S.C. § 1693m(a)(2)(B)(ii) — 1 case

Sanders, Michelle v. Jackson, John L., 209 F.3d 998 (7th Cir. 2000).

— 15 U.S.C. § 1693m(a)(3) — 6 cases

Bernhard v. Whitney Nat'l Bank, 523 F.3d 546 (5th Cir. 2008).

Daye v. Cmty. Fin. Serv. Centers, LLC, 233 F. Supp. 3d 946 (D.N.M. 2017). “See Supportive MSJ Brief at 19-20 (quoting 15 U.S.C.A § 1693m). Based on these criteria, Daye says, the Court should award her one percent of Speedy Loan’s “mean average” net worth during 2013 and 2014.”

David Hooks v. Landmark Indus., Inc., 797 F.3d 309 (5th Cir. 2015).

Johnson v. Midwest ATM, Inc., 881 F. Supp. 2d 1071 (D. Minnesota 2012).

Daugherty v. The Fed. Sav. Bank (C.D. Ill. 2021).

— 15 U.S.C. § 1693m(a)(l) — 8 cases

Vallies v. Sky Bank, 591 F.3d 152 (3rd Cir. 2009).

Brown v. Bank of Am., N.A., 457 F. Supp. 2d 82 (D. Mass. 2006).

Cobb v. Monarch Fin. Corp., 913 F. Supp. 1164 (N.D. Ill. 1995).

— 15 U.S.C. § 1693m(b) — 1 case

Greathouse v. Comerica Bank (D.N.M. 2025).

— 15 U.S.C. § 1693m(b)(1) — 1 case

Hebert v. Allegiant Capital Recovery Servs., LLC (W.D.N.Y. 2019).

— 15 U.S.C. § 1693m(b)(2) — 4 cases

Ashby v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Oregon, 592 F. Supp. 2d 1307 (D. Or. 2008).

Polo v. Goodings Supermarkets, Inc., 232 F.R.D. 399 (M.D. Fla. 2004).

Ballard v. Branch Banking & Trust Co., 284 F.R.D. 9 (D.D.C. 2012).

— 15 U.S.C. § 1693m(b)(l) — 1 case

Collins v. Missouri Elec. Cooperatives Employees Credit Union, 313 F. App'x 911 (8th Cir. 2008).

— 15 U.S.C. § 1693m(c) — 8 cases

Pike v. Nick's English Hut, Inc., 937 F. Supp. 2d 956 (S.D. Ind. 2013).

In re Cardtronics ATM Fee Notice Litig., 874 F. Supp. 2d 916 (S.D. Cal. 2012).

Newman v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (S.D.N.Y. 2024).

Cohen v. Capital One, N.A., 921 F. Supp. 2d 107 (S.D.N.Y. 2013).

— 15 U.S.C. § 1693m(d) — 9 cases

Pike v. Nick's English Hut, Inc., 937 F. Supp. 2d 956 (S.D. Ind. 2013).

Matthew Dragotta v. West View Sav. Bank, 395 F. App'x 828 (3rd Cir. 2010).

Feinman v. Bank of Delaware, 728 F. Supp. 1105 (D. Del. 1990).

Azose v. Washington Mut. Bank, 588 F. Supp. 2d 366 (E.D.N.Y 2008).

Villalobos (D. Kan. 2026).

— 15 U.S.C. § 1693m(d)(1) — 5 cases

Carol Tims v. LGE Cmty. Credit Union, 935 F.3d 1228 (11th Cir. 2019). “See 15 U.S.C. § 1693m. Congress further directed the CFPB to draft boilerplate language to help financial institutions "compl[y] with the disclosure requirements" for overdraft services.”

Pinkston-Poling v. Advia Credit Union, 227 F. Supp. 3d 848 (W.D. Mich. 2016). “Conclusion For the foregoing reasons, the Court will deny Advia’s motion to dismiss and allow Plaintiffs breach of contract and EFTA claims to proceed.”

Rader v. Sandia Lab'y Fed. Credit Union (D.N.M. 2021).

Judith Betzer, individually & on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Frontier Credit Union (D. Idaho 2026).

— 15 U.S.C. § 1693m(d)(2) — 15 cases

Bettencourt v. Jeanne D'Arc Credit Union, 370 F. Supp. 3d 258 (D.D.C. 2019).

Berenson v. Nat'l Fin. Servs., LLC, 403 F. Supp. 2d 133 (D. Mass. 2005).

Rita Grenier & Edwin Grenier, Individually & on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. P Granite State Credit Union, Does 1 through 5, 2021 DNH 172 (D.N.H. 2021).

— 15 U.S.C. § 1693m(d)(l) — 2 cases

Matthew Dragotta v. West View Sav. Bank, 395 F. App'x 828 (3rd Cir. 2010).

Curde v. Tri-City Bank & Trust Co., 826 S.W.2d 911 (Tenn. 1992).

— 15 U.S.C. § 1693m(e) — 3 cases

Buechler v. Your Wine & Spirit Shoppe, Inc., 846 F. Supp. 2d 406 (D. Maryland 2012). “15 U.S.C. § 1693m(a) (emphasis added). Congress chose the broader word "person” rather than the narrower term "financial institution” to define who could be held liable and employed the same terminology in providing protection from liability.”

Cobb v. PayLease LLC, 34 F. Supp. 3d 976 (D. Minnesota 2014).

Neal v. Pentagon Fed. Credit Union (D. Maryland 2019).

— 15 U.S.C. § 1693m(f) — 13 cases

Marx v. Gen. Revenue Corp., 668 F.3d 1174 (10th Cir. 2011). “§ 1875 (d)(2) (awarding "reasonable attorney's fees as part of the costs" to employers who successfully defend against suits that are "frivolous, vexatious, or brought in bad faith" by employees claiming to have been punished for jury service); 15 U.S.C. § 1693m(f) (awarding…”

Van Tassell v. United Mktg. Grp., LLC, 795 F. Supp. 2d 770 (N.D. Ill. 2011).

Fallen v. GREP Sw., LLC, 247 F. Supp. 3d 1165 (D.N.M. 2017).

Moore v. Southtrust Corp., 392 F. Supp. 2d 724 (E.D. Va. 2005).

— 15 U.S.C. § 1693m(g) — 36 cases

Wendorf v. Landers, 755 F. Supp. 2d 972 (N.D. Ill. 2010).

United Healthcare Servs., Inc. v. First St. Hosp. LP, 570 S.W.3d 323 (Tex. App. 2018).

Bettencourt v. Jeanne D'Arc Credit Union, 370 F. Supp. 3d 258 (D.D.C. 2019).

Geimer v. Bank of Am., N.A., 784 F. Supp. 2d 926 (N.D. Ill. 2011).

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.