How have courts interpreted section 1717.5 of the California Consumer Protection Act, allowing a plaintiff to sue a bank for attorney fees?

We look first at the statutory language, giving effect to its plain meaning. If the words are clear, "we may not add to or alter them to accomplish a purpose that does not appear on the face of the statute or from its legislative history." (Burden v. Snowden (1992) 2 Cal.4th 556, 562.) The language of section 1717.5 is clear: banks are not entitled to attorney fees. The statute does not say whether bank assignees are entitled to attorney fees when they sue to collect a credit card debt owed to a bank.