Press "Enter" to skip to content

Posts tagged as “FCRA”

Recklessly Disregarding a Nonexistent Risk of Harm: Does Including the Expiration Date on Electronically Printed Receipts Constitute Willful Noncompliance under FACTA?

The Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act prohibits merchants from including, among other information, credit- and debit-card expiration dates on printed receipts. After this provision originally became effective in 2004, plaintiff class-action firms flooded courts with expiration date lawsuits, which courts and others “met with varying degrees of contempt.”

2019: A Watershed Year for Consumer Financial Services Law

It has been an extraordinary 365 days for consumer financial services law. I cannot recall a year where so many states introduced legislation or proposed regulations or rules impacting the credit industry. At the federal level, proposed rules for the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act were (finally) released and California also proposed regulations under the California Consumer Privacy Act.

9th Cir. Holds FCRA ‘Permissible Purpose’ Plaintiff Had Standing, Establishes Elements for Such Claims

In a case of first impression in that circuit, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently reversed a trial court’s dismissal of a consumer’s Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) claim for lack of standing and failure to state a claim, holding that the plaintiff had Article III standing. In so ruling, the Ninth Circuit held that the consumer suffered a concrete injury in fact when a bank obtained her credit report for a purpose not authorized by the statute, and it was irrelevant whether the report was published or used by the party requesting it. The Court…

6th Cir. Holds FCRA Preempts State Common Law Claims, Joins 2nd and 7th Cirs.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit recently affirmed a judgment in favor of the furnisher of credit information in an action filed under the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act and other claims under state common law. In so ruling, the Sixth Circuit held that the FCRA’s preemption provisions apply to state common law claims concerning a furnisher’s reporting obligations, joining similar rulings by the Seventh and Second Circuits. A copy of the opinion in Scott v. First Southern National Bank is available at:  Link to Opinion. The plaintiffs owned several investment properties and obtained a $300,000 commercial…

9th Cir. Holds No FCRA Violation by CRA When Dispute Did Not Come ‘Directly’ From Consumer

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that where a company sent dispute letters to a credit reporting agency on behalf of a consumer, but the consumer did not identify the items to be disputed, review the letters, or otherwise play any role in preparing the letters, the letters did not come “directly” from the consumer, and the CRA was not required to conduct a reinvestigation under section 1681i of the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). As a result, the Ninth Circuit held that the CRA did not violate section 1681i, and also did not act…

6th Cir. Rejects FCRA ‘Credit File Disclosure’ Claim for Lack of Spokeo Standing

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit recently held that a plaintiff lacked Article III standing to sue a consumer reporting agency under the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) for allegedly failing to disclose all information in his file. In so ruling, the Sixth Circuit held that the alleged deprivation of information had no consequences for the consumer and imposed no real risk of harm to establish injury in fact. A copy of the opinion in Huff v. TeleCheck Services, Inc. is available at:  Link to Opinion. The consumer reporting agency (CRA) advises merchants on whether it should…

2nd Cir. Holds Entity is Not a ‘CRA’ Unless It ‘Intends’ to Provide ‘Consumer Reports’ Under FCRA

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently affirmed entry of summary judgment in favor of a prominent media and information firm against a job seeker’s claims that it furnished false information in a purported “consumer report” obtained by a prospective employer in alleged violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. In so ruling, the Court concluded that the media company was not a “consumer reporting agency,” because it did not intend to furnish “consumer reports” through its services, and thus was not subject to the FCRA, 15 U.S.C. § 1681, et seq. A copy of the opinion…

11th Cir. Rules in Favor of Mortgage Servicer in FCRA Putative Class Action

In an unpublished ruling, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently affirmed dismissal of a borrower’s putative class action suit filed against a mortgagee alleging violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act for failing to conduct a reasonable investigation into disputed information reported to the credit reporting agencies. In so ruling, the Court concluded that the borrower failed to demonstrate that a reasonable investigation would have uncovered an inaccuracy in certain information provided by the mortgagee to the credit reporting agencies, and the mortgagee had no duty to investigate a separate dispute because the borrower did not…

7th Cir. Rejects Plaintiff’s Effort to Run Up Attorney’s Fees After Rejecting Reasonable Offer

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it reduced the plaintiff’s counsel’s $187,410 fee claim to $10,875 after the debtor recovered only a $1,000 statutory damages award on his federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act claim at trial and the debt collector had issued a Rule 68 offer of judgment early in the case that exceeded the amount the debtor recovered. A copy of the opinion in Paz v. Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC is available at:  Link to Opinion. After a debt collector purchased a debtor’s…

4th Cir. Holds FCRA Furnisher Liability Claim Not Viable Against Federal Gov’t

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit recently held that a trial court lacked jurisdiction over a claim for violation of the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act involving a student loan administered by the U.S. Department of Education because Congress did not waive sovereign immunity for suits under FCRA. A copy of the opinion in Robinson v. U.S. Department of Education is available at:  Link to Opinion. This appeal arose from the plaintiff’s claim that the government agency responsible for administering the federal student loan program violated FCRA, 15 U.S.C. § 1681, et seq. The plaintiff alleged that the government…