Virginia Code

Va. Code Ann. § 59.1-204 (2026)

Individual action for damages or penalty

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section VA-LISlaw.lis.virginia.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A. Any person who suffers loss as the result of a violation of this chapter shall be entitled to initiate an action to recover actual damages, or $500, whichever is greater. If the trier of fact finds that the violation was willful, it may increase damages to an amount not exceeding three times the actual damages sustained, or $1,000, whichever is greater. Any person who accepts a cure offer under this chapter may not initiate or maintain any other or additional action based on any cause of action arising under any other statute or common law theory if such other action is substantially based on the same allegations of fact on which the action initiated under this chapter is based.

B. Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, in addition to any damages awarded, such person also may be awarded reasonable attorneys' fees and court costs.

C. No cure offer shall be admissible in any proceeding initiated under this section, unless the cure offer is delivered by a supplier to the person claiming loss or to any attorney representing such person, prior to the filing of the supplier's initial responsive pleading in such proceeding. If the cure offer is timely delivered by the supplier, then the supplier may introduce the cure offer into evidence at trial. The supplier shall not be liable for such person's attorneys' fees and court costs incurred following delivery of the cure offer unless the actual damages found to have been sustained and awarded, without consideration of attorneys' fees and court costs, exceed the value of the cure offer.

D. In any action which the parties desire to settle all matters in dispute, the question of whether the plaintiff shall be awarded reasonable attorneys' fees and court costs in accordance with subsections B and C may be tendered to the court for consideration of the amount of such an award, if any.

1977, c. 635; 1995, cc. 703, 726; 2004, cc. 41, 90; 2005, c. 250; 2006, c. 453.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 98 cases (21 in the last 5 years), 1982–2026 · leading case: Holmes v. LG Marion Corp., 521 S.E.2d 528 (Va. 1999).
Holmes v. LG Marion Corp., 521 S.E.2d 528 (Va. 1999). · cites it 56× “We will affirm the judgment of the trial court because we conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in determining the amount of the attorneys' fee award or in refusing to enhance the amount of actual damages pursuant to Code § 59.1-204. Although the trial court…”
Valley Acceptance Corp. v. Glasby, 337 S.E.2d 291 (Va. 1985). · cites it 16× “00 in attorney's fees, under Code § 59.1-204, [4] for violation of Code §§ 59.”
Caitlin Ahearn v. Hyundai Motor Am., 881 F.3d 679 (9th Cir. 2018). · cites it 6× “See Va. Code Ann. §59.1-204 (A). On November 6, 2013, the MDL judicial panel identified the Gentry action as a tag-along action, and transferred it to the Central District of California as part of MDL No.”
Caitlin Ahearn v. Hyundai Motor Am., 926 F.3d 539 (9th Cir. 2019). · cites it 2× “6 In particular, the applicable Virginia consumer protection statute guarantees a minimum of $500 in damages, see Va. Code Ann. § 59.1-204 (A), while the applicable California statute provides for actual damages, without a statutory minimum, see Cal.”
Mazza v. Am. Honda Motor Co., Inc., 666 F.3d 581 (9th Cir. 2012). · cites it 2× “July 21, 2000); Va.Code Ann. § 59.1-204; Ala.Code § 8-19-10(f) (1981).”
Synergistic Int'l, LLC v. Korman, 402 F. Supp. 2d 651 (E.D. Va. 2005). · cites it 14× “” If violations of the act are willful, a court “may increase damages to an amount not exceeding three times the actual damages sustained, or $ 1,000, whichever is greater.”
Nigh v. Koons Buick Pontiac GMC, Inc., 143 F. Supp. 2d 535 (E.D. Va. 2001). · cites it 5× “§ 59.1-204. For the reasons stated above in relation to RISC 1, the Court grants summary judgment on the allegation that Koons’ representation to Nigh that the Truck had an accurate odometer was a deception.”
Abi-Najm v. Concord Condo., LLC, 699 S.E.2d 483 (Va. 2010). · cites it 2× “" As in their breach of contract count, the Purchasers claimed damages of $50,000 per condominium, treble damages pursuant to Code § 59.1-204(A), and $350,000 in punitive damages, in addition to prejudgment interest and costs including attorney's fees.”
Wilkins v. Peninsula Motor Cars, Inc., 587 S.E.2d 581 (Va. 2003). · cites it 4× “By agreement of the parties, the issue of attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to Code § 59.1-204(B) was reserved for determination by the trial court and was later fixed at $34,183.”
Kaltman v. All Am. Pest Control, Inc., 706 S.E.2d 864 (Va. 2011). · cites it 2× “See Code § 59.1-204. We are not persuaded by these suggested distinctions.”
Maple v. Colonial Orthopaedics, Inc. (In Re Maple), 434 B.R. 363 (Bankr. E.D. Va. 2010). · cites it 7× “The VCPA provides that “[a]ny person who suffers loss as the result of a violation of [the statute] shall be entitled to initiate an action to recover actual damages, or $500, whichever is greater.”
Chisolm v. TranSouth Fin. Corp., 194 F.R.D. 538 (E.D. Va. 2000). · cites it 3× “” Va.Code § 59.1-204 (Michie 1998): In this provision, the Virginia General Assembly invests in individuals “who suffer loss as a result of a violation” a right of recovery.”
— Va. Code Ann. § 59.1-204(1)(A) — 1 case
Clark v. Orkin Exterminating Co., 147 F. Supp. 2d 458 (W.D. Va. 2001).
— Va. Code Ann. § 59.1-204(8) — 1 case
Peter Farrell Supercars, Inc. v. Monsen, 82 F. App'x 293 (4th Cir. 2003).
— Va. Code Ann. § 59.1-204(A) — 25 cases
Holmes v. LG Marion Corp., 521 S.E.2d 528 (Va. 1999). “We will affirm the judgment of the trial court because we conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in determining the amount of the attorneys' fee award or in refusing to enhance the amount of actual damages pursuant to Code § 59.1-204. Although the trial court…”
Synergistic Int'l, LLC v. Korman, 402 F. Supp. 2d 651 (E.D. Va. 2005). “” If violations of the act are willful, a court “may increase damages to an amount not exceeding three times the actual damages sustained, or $ 1,000, whichever is greater.”
Abi-Najm v. Concord Condo., LLC, 699 S.E.2d 483 (Va. 2010). “" As in their breach of contract count, the Purchasers claimed damages of $50,000 per condominium, treble damages pursuant to Code § 59.1-204(A), and $350,000 in punitive damages, in addition to prejudgment interest and costs including attorney's fees.”
Nigh v. Koons Buick Pontiac GMC, Inc., 143 F. Supp. 2d 535 (E.D. Va. 2001). “§ 59.1-204. For the reasons stated above in relation to RISC 1, the Court grants summary judgment on the allegation that Koons’ representation to Nigh that the Truck had an accurate odometer was a deception.”
Maple v. Colonial Orthopaedics, Inc. (In Re Maple), 434 B.R. 363 (Bankr. E.D. Va. 2010). “The VCPA provides that “[a]ny person who suffers loss as the result of a violation of [the statute] shall be entitled to initiate an action to recover actual damages, or $500, whichever is greater.”
— Va. Code Ann. § 59.1-204(B) — 16 cases
Holmes v. LG Marion Corp., 521 S.E.2d 528 (Va. 1999). “We will affirm the judgment of the trial court because we conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in determining the amount of the attorneys' fee award or in refusing to enhance the amount of actual damages pursuant to Code § 59.1-204. Although the trial court…”
Wilkins v. Peninsula Motor Cars, Inc., 587 S.E.2d 581 (Va. 2003). “By agreement of the parties, the issue of attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to Code § 59.1-204(B) was reserved for determination by the trial court and was later fixed at $34,183.”
Baker v. Elam, 883 F. Supp. 2d 576 (E.D. Va. 2012).
Synergistic Int'l, LLC v. Korman, 402 F. Supp. 2d 651 (E.D. Va. 2005). “” If violations of the act are willful, a court “may increase damages to an amount not exceeding three times the actual damages sustained, or $ 1,000, whichever is greater.”
Pitchford v. Oakwood Mobile Homes, Inc., 212 F. Supp. 2d 613 (W.D. Va. 2002).
— Va. Code Ann. § 59.1-204(D) — 1 case
Shore v. Keystone RV Co. (W.D. Va. 2025).
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.