Skip to Content (Press Enter)

Skip to Nav (Press Enter)

15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(b)

Subscribe to Consumer Finance

Thank you for your desire to subscribe to Severson & Werson’s Consumer Finance Weblog. In order to subscribe, you must provide a valid name and e-mail address. This too will be retained on our server. When you push the “subscribe button”, we will send an electronic mail to the address that you provided asking you to confirm your subscription to our Weblog. By pushing the “subscribe button”, you represent and warrant that you are over the age of 18 years old, are the owner/authorized user of that e-mail address, and are entitled to receive e-mails at that address. Our weblog will retain your name and e-mail address on its server, or the server of its web host. However, we won’t share any of this information with anyone except the Firm’s employees and contractors, except under certain extraordinary circumstances described on our Privacy Policy and (About The Consumer Finance Blog/About the Appellate Tracker Weblog) Page. NOTICE AND AGREEMENT REGARDING E-MAILS AND CALLS/TEXT MESSAGES TO LAND-LINE AND WIRELESS TELEPHONES: By providing your contact information and confirming your subscription in response to the initial e-mail that we send you, you agree to receive e-mail messages from Severson & Werson from time-to-time and understand and agree that such messages are or may be sent by means of automated dialing technology. If you have your email forwarded to other electronic media, including text messages and cellular telephone by way of VoIP, internet, social media, or otherwise, you agree to receive my messages in that way. This may result in charges to you. Your agreement and consent also extend to any other agents, affiliates, or entities to whom our communications are forwarded. You agree that you will notify Severson & Werson in writing if you revoke this agreement and that your revocation will not be effective until you notify Severson & Werson in writing. You understand and agree that you will afford Severson & Werson a reasonable time to unsubscribe you from the website, that the ability to do so depends on Severson & Werson’s press of business and access to the weblog, and that you may still receive one or more emails or communications from weblog until we are able to unsubscribe you.

In Radney v. Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC, 2016 WL 3551677, at *3 (N.D.Ill., 2016), Judge Darrah denied a motion to dismiss a FCRA claim arising out of a creditor's post-discharge credit reporting. Bayview argues that Plaintiff's allegations are refuted by the documents attached to his Amended Complaint. Specifically, Bayview references a corrected credit report dated September 4, 2015, from Experian,… Read More

In Noori v. Bank of America, here, Judge Andre Birotte granted summary judgment to a bank in an FCRA case.  Judge Birotte found that the Plaintiff produced no evidence that the CRAs ever forwarded a dispute to the furnisher and, accordingly, no FCRA claim could lie. "Plaintiff has produced no evidence that BofA received, from any CRA, a notice of dispute through… Read More

In Jackson v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc., et. al., 2016 WL 2910027, at *3-5 (N.D.Ill., 2016), Judge Kennelly found that a Chapter 13 debtor stated a claim that a loan servicer's post-Chapter 13 bankruptcy reporting remained inaccurate even after the furnisher made corrections because it did not correct all the inaccuracies in the consumer's report. In count 2 of his complaint, Jackson… Read More

In Shaw v. Equinox Information Solutions, Inc., 2016 WL 2344353, at *3-5 (E.D.Mich., 2016), Judge Hood denied a Motion to Dismiss a FCRA case, saying that a case was better suited for summary judgment. Plaintiff's cause of action is based on her contention that Defendants inaccurately reported that the account was charged off on multiple occasions over a series of months. Specifically,… Read More

In Blakeney v. Experian Information Solutions, 2016 WL 1535085, at *1-2 (N.D.Cal., 2016), Judge Koh grants a Motion to Dismiss filed by a FCRA furnisher who was alleged to have failed to properly re-investigate a dispute regarding an account that passed through Chapter 13. On November 7, 2014, Plaintiff filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy. ECF No. 1 (“Compl.”) ¶ 5. “Chapter… Read More

In Asufrin v. Roundpoint Mortgage Servicing Corporation, 2016 WL 1056669, at *1 (N.D.Ill., 2016), Judge Aspen allowed a bankruptcy FCRA claim to proceed past the pleadings stage.  In Asufrin, the Plaintiff alleged that RoundPoint mismanaged the credit reporting of her mortgage loan after she obtained a bankruptcy discharge.  Despite Plaintiff's order of discharge, her Experian credit report revealed that RoundPoint was reporting the… Read More

In Mestayer v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc, 2016 WL 631980, at *1 (N.D.Cal., 2016), Judge Chen dismissed a Plaintiff's FCRA/CCRAA claims grounded in credit reporting during bankruptcy proceedings. On or about November 25, 2013, Ms. Mestayer filed for bankruptcy in the Northern District of California. On or about April 20, 2014, she received a bankruptcy discharge. During the bankruptcy proceedings, Ms.… Read More

In Abeyta v. Bank of America, N.A., 2016 WL 304308, at *2 (D.Nev., 2016), Judge Jones found that a bank's reporting, post-discharge, of a consumer's pre-petition debt as being in default, did not violate the FCRA because the report was not inaccurate.  The facts were as follows. Plaintiff Ginney Abeyta filed for bankruptcy in this District in June 2010. (Compl.… Read More

In Powers v. Selcon Community Credit Union, et. al., 2016 WL 126739, at *4-5 (D.Or. 2016), Judge McShane denied summary judgment to a FCRA furnisher defendant on the reasonableness of its re-investigation.  The takeaways from the decision are four, from someone who has handled a number of such cases.  First, the decision demonstrates how granular these cases can get in terms of… Read More

In Buckley v. AFNI, Inc., 2016 WL 70847, at *2-3 (S.D.Ind., 2016), Judge Baker found that a debt collector violated the FCRA and the FDCPA when it initiated collection activities against a bankrupt debtor.  First, the District Court found that the debt collector's pulling of a credit report violated the FCRA because no debt existed post-bankruptcy. Both parties have moved for summary judgment… Read More

Dao v. Cello Partnership,  2015 WL 7572304, at *3-5 (D.Minn., 2015), Judge Tunheim granted summary judgment to a FCRA defendant because the Plaintiff -- from an evidentiary standpoint -- could no establish compensable loss. Dao first argues that he was denied mortgage refinancing with PrimeLending because of Verizon's failure to investigate and report the fraudulent accounts. Specifically, Dao contends that PrimeLending relied… Read More

In Snyder v. Nationstar Mortgage, LLC, 2015 WL 7075622, at *7-8 (N.D.Cal., 2015), Magistrate Judge Corley allowed a FCRA/Rosenthal Act claim past the pleadings stage.  As to the FCRA claim, the Court found that the question of FCRA accuracy is determined past the pleadings stage. To state a claim under the FCRA against...a furnisher of credit information, the [p]laintiff must allege that… Read More

In Vasquez-Estrada v. Collecto, Inc., 2015 WL 6163971, at *2 (D.Or., 2015), Judge Stewart addressed some FCRA rules for furnishers in the context of identity theft. Defendant also argues that plaintiff has been compensated for these same damages through his settlement with the CRAs in separate litigation. However, the settlement with the CRAs resolved only claims under the FCRA, not… Read More

In Heaton v. Social Finance,  2015 WL 6003119, at *3 (N.D.Cal., 2015), Judge Henderson found that defendant's online credit application might be mere comparison shopping such that there was no permissible purpose under FCRA to pull the consumer's credit report. Plaintiffs Shawn Heaton (“Heaton”) and Anna Ahlborn (“Ahlborn”) each visited Defendants' website and had slightly different experiences. Both Plaintiffs registered for the… Read More

In Prosser v. Navient Solutions, Inc., 2015 WL 5168635 (N.D. Cal. 2015), Judge Conti found that a student loan lender conducted a reasonable re-investigation under FCRA after the Plaintiff claimed to be a victim of identity theft. Parties agree that there is only a private right of action to pursue claims pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1681s–2(b), under §§ 1681n &… Read More

In Gustafson v. Experian Info. Solutions Inc., No. 2:14-CV-01453-ODW EX, 2015 WL 3477071, at *6 (C.D. Cal. June 2, 2015), Judge Wright granted summary judgment to a debt collector on a Plaintiff's FCRA claim, alleging that the debt was "double-reported". “[S]ummary judgment is not precluded altogether on questions of reasonableness,” but “[i]t is only appropriate ‘when only one conclusion about the… Read More

I know it's a real property case, but the argument is something that we've seen a bit of in California on the personal property side.  In Groff v. Wells Fargo Home Mortg., Inc., 2015 WL 2169811 (E.D. Mich. 2015), Judge Lawson found that the defendant did not violate the Fair Credit Reporting Act when it reported that the plaintiff’s bankruptcy-discharged… Read More

In Horsch v. Wells Fargo Home Mortg., 2015 WL 1344836 (E.D.Pa. 2015), Judge Yohn found that furnishers had properly reported accounts post-bankruptcy where the debtors had made post-bankruptcy payments.  Judge Yohn explained the standards for a furnishers’ re-investigation even where it was conceded that the furnishers’ re-investigation was reasonable. The court cautioned that this issue “is normally a question for… Read More

In Wright v. Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC, 2015 WL 859604 (E.D.Cal. 2015), Judge Thurston held that an FCRA plaintiff must plead that the furnisher actually received the dispute from the CRA in order to state a claim under FCRA. Here, Plaintiff alleges that Defendant is a furnisher under the FCRA, and that Defendant “failed to conduct a proper and lawful… Read More

1 4 5 6 7 8 9