CCRAA -- Civil Code § 1785.25

In Carvalho v. Equifax Information Services, LLC, -- F.3d -- 2010 WL 3239477 (9th Cir. 2010), the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit confirmed FCRA pre-emption of California's CCRAA -- except Civil Code 1785.25(a).  The Court of Appeals explained: Because the private right of action to enforce section 1785.25(a) is found in sections 1785.25(g) and 1785.31, which are not… Read More

In Wang v. Asset Acceptance, L.L.C., 2010 WL 40984 (N.D.Cal. 2010), Judge Conti rejected Plaintiff's assertion that the duty to report accurate information information under Civil Code 1785.25(a) also includes the obligation to note an account as disputed, since such obligation is required by section 1785.25(c).  Judge Conti explained Here, in his second cause of action, Wang alleges that despite being… Read More

The 9th Circuit and a number of California Court of Appeal decisions have split on FCRA pre-emption of California's CCRAA.   We wrote about it here.  The parties have sought rehearing of Gorman in the 9th Circuit.  Some of the briefs are here:  MBNA's Brief on Rehearing; CDIA's Amicus Brief on Rehearing, CBA's Amicus Brief on Rehearing; Gorman's Opposition to Rehearing;… Read More

The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit today allowed the National Association of Screening Agencies, the California Bankers Association, and the Consumer Data Industry Association leave to file amicus curiae briefs in support of Defendant-Appellee’s Petition for Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc.  See the Order here and my article here regarding the split of authority between the federal and state appellate… Read More

In Drew v. Equifax, 2009 WL 595459 (N.D.Cal. 2009), Judge Illston held that a furnisher was on notice of a consumer dispute when the CRA merely sent a letter to the furnisher notifying the furnisher that it had deleted the customer’s trade-line because the account was fraudulent.   Judge Illston explained:   Chase contends that it is entitled to summary judgment… Read More

See my March 4, 2009 article in the Consumer Financial Services Law Report here.   Source:  Consumer Financial Services Law Report. Copyright 2009 by LRP Publications, P.O. Box 24668, West Palm Beach, FL 33416-4668. All rights reserved. For more information on this or other products published by LRP Publications, please call 1-800-341-7874 or visit their website at: www.shoplrp.com   Read More

In Sanai v. Saltz --- Cal.Rptr.3d ----, 2009 WL 162059 (2009), the Second District Court of Appeal declined to follow the First District Court of Appeal's decision in Liceaga on December 30, 2008 (http://www.calautofinance.com/?p=336), finding a private right of action under the CCRAA (Civil Code § 1785.25(a)) pre-empted by FCRA.  Instead, the Second District Court of Appeal followed the Court… Read More

In Gorman v. Wolpoff & Abramson, LLP, __ F.3d __ 2009 WL 57091 (9th Cir. 2009) the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held, among other things, that FCRA does not pre-empt Civil Code 1785.25 of the CCRAA.  This holding overrules multiple district court opinions to the contrary, and is opposite to the California Court of Appeal's decision on December… Read More

In Liceaga v. Debt Recovery Solutions, L.L.C. __ Cal.App.4th __ 2008 WL 5392184 (2008), the First District Court of Appeal found no private right of action under California's Consumer Credit Reporting Agencies Act because FCRA pre-empts it.  The Court explained We are not alone in our determination that the California exception is limited and does not allow a private right… Read More

In Roybal v. Equifax, Judge England issued three separate opinions addressing liability of furnishers and credit reporting agencies.  In Roybal v. Equifax, 2008 WL 453447 (E.D.Cal. 2008), Judge England addressed the CRAs for publishing allegedly inaccurate credit information about the plaintiff.  First, Judge England allowed a wife to pursue a claim for inaccuracies in the husband's credit report:   The… Read More