Skip to Content (Press Enter)

Skip to Nav (Press Enter)

FCRA -- 15 U.S.C. § 1681

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 Gadomski v. Patelco Credit Union, No. 2:17-cv-00695-TLN-AC, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 51070 (E.D. Cal. Mar. 23, 2020), Judge Nunley dismissed an FDCPA case because of the lack of damages. Plaintiff further contends that FRCA plaintiffs may prove a claim for actual damages by showing the unreasonable investigation of a credit dispute has resulted in emotional harm or humiliation, even… Read More

In Ku v. Trans, No. 2:18-CV-1714 JCM (BNW), 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 27474 (D. Nev. Feb. 18, 2020), Judge Mahan ruled against an FCRA Plaintiff alleging inaccurate reporting of a bankrupt account. Unsurprisingly, information in a consumer report is inaccurate if it is patently incorrect. Carvalho, 629 F.3d at 890. Even if information is "technically accurate," however, it may be… Read More

In Marshall v. Robins Fin. Credit Union, No. 5:19-CV-260 (MTT), 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22274 (M.D. Ga. Feb. 10, 2020), Judge Treadwell found against an FCRA Plaintiff in a ‘scheduled monthly payment’ claim. Robins argues that it did not furnish an inaccurate tradeline because the monthly payment amount of $524.00 is an accurate "historical term" for an account that it… Read More

In Sullivan v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., No. 19-0234-WS-M, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 196114 (S.D. Ala. Nov. 12, 2019), Judge Steele allowed a “permissible purpose’ FCRA case past the pleadings stage despite the commercial nature of the transaction. Entangled with the defendant's [*16]  argument that it did not pull a "consumer report" is the argument that "FCRA does not apply to… Read More

In Cowley v. Equifax Info. Servs., No. 2:18-cv-02846-TLP-cgc, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 193522 (W.D. Tenn. Nov. 7, 2019, the District Court refused to allow a scheduled monthly payment issue case to proceed under the FCRA. The only evidence Plaintiff [*9]  brings to defeat UCFSC's motion for summary judgment is that the industry guideline, the CRRG, suggests that when a furnisher of… Read More

In Persinger v. Sw. Credit Sys., No. 1:19-cv-00853-RLY-MJD, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 188920, at *9 (S.D. Ind. Oct. 30, 2019), the Defendant was sued in a class action for accessing a consumer's credit report after the consumer's account had been discharged in bankruptcy; i.e. that the defendant had no permissible purpose in accessing the consumer report for account review purposes… Read More

In Nayab v. Capital One Bank USA, No. 17-55944, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 32575, at *24-32 (9th Cir. Oct. 31, 2019), the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit found that an FCRA Plaintiff met the Spokeo and Iqbal/Twombly standards for pleading a "Permissible Purpose" action under the FCRA. Nayab has pleaded facts sufficient to give rise to a reasonable… Read More

In Rodriguez v. Trans Union Llc & Santander Cosumer United States, No. 1:19-CV-379-LY, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 186016 (W.D. Tex. Oct. 28, 2019), Magistrate Judge Yeakel found no inaccuracy in how a closed automobile account was being reported.  The Plaintiff claimed that her credit report erroneously stated that she owed a monthly payment of $345 on an account (the "Santander Account")… Read More

In Jackling v. HSBC Bank USA, N.A., No. 15-CV-6148-FPG, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146675, at *6-7 (W.D.N.Y. Aug. 28, 2019), Judge Geraci granted a furnisher's motion in limine to limit damages. In its First Motion in Limine, HSBC argues that Jackling should be precluded from introducing evidence on damages related to the Dorschel Toyota credit denial because Dorschel denied him… Read More

In Galea v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., No. 2:19-cv-00386-JAM-AC, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 129028 (E.D. Cal. Aug. 1, 2019), Judge Mendez addressed the proper reporting of Chapter 13 bankrupt accounts. Galea filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy in September 2012. FAC ¶ 39. Over the next five years, she made all the payments required under her bankruptcy plan. FAC ¶¶ 42-49.… Read More

In Marna Paintsil Anning v. Capital One Auto Fin., No. 19-cv-01686-KAW, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 128039, at *8-9 (N.D. Cal. July 31, 2019) , Judge Westmore said that an FCRA Plaintiff can get past the pleadings on an FCRA Re-investigation claim where the Plaintiff can allege specific inaccuracies with  reporting, no response from regarding the dispute, and that the credit… Read More

In Donald Cable v. Midland Funding, No. 3:19-CV-00015-GFVT, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 115597 (E.D. Ky. July 11, 2019), Judge Van Tatenhove dismissed an FCRA claim. The Complaint acknowledges that CCU was notified of Mr. Cable's dispute and CCU subsequently verified the debt with the credit reporting agencies, [R. 1 at ¶¶ 30-31], but leaves the Court left to guess as… Read More

In Sanchez v. U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n, No. 8:18-cv-00500-JLS-KS, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 108692 (C.D. Cal. June 27, 2019), Judge Staton denied an FCRA/CCRAA Plaintiff’s MSJ that proceeded on the claim that the Plaintiff’s father allegedly falsely took out credit on Plaintiff’s behalf.  The facts were as follows: On August 22, 2015, an individual whom Plaintiff claims is his father,… Read More

In Zemelka v. Trans, No. CV-18-04179-PHX-SMB, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91207 (D. Ariz. May 31, 2019), Judge Brnovich dismissed an FCRA claim against a CRA arising from bankruptcy reporting due to the absence of an inaccuracy. Plaintiff has two claims against Defendant Trans Union. The first is a clam under 15 U.S.C. §1681e(b) and the second under 15 U.S.C. §1681i.… Read More

In Hernandez v. Certified Fed. Credit Union, No. CV 18-10448-CJC (JEMx), 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 79020, at *6-9 (C.D. Cal. May 9, 2019), Judge Carney allowed an FCRA claim to proceed despite a challenge to Plaintiff's Article III standing. Plaintiffs have alleged a sufficiently "concrete and [*7]  particularized" injury. Under the FCRA and CCCRAA, a credit report or credit information is… Read More

In Huff v. Telecheckservices,inc, No. 18-5438, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 13367 (6th Cir. May 3, 2019), the Court of Appeal for the Sixth Circuit found that an FCRA plaintiff had no no Art. III standing. This case deals with a fading technology (checks) and an evergreen imperative (Article III standing). When a customer buys something with a check, merchants often… Read More

In Hall v. Southwest Credit Sys., L.P., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73350, *5-11 (D.C. Dist. May 1, 2019), Judge Howell found that a debt collector's failure to report to the consumer reporting agencies that the account was "disputed" could violate multiple provisions of the FDCPA. This case concerns one allegation: The defendant reported a debt to credit bureaus that the… Read More

In Chandler v. Peoples Bank & Tr. Co., No. 18-5361, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 12100, at *13-14 (6th Cir. Apr. 24, 2019), an FCRA plaintiff complained that a creditor and it's assignee breached a bankruptcy re-affirmation agreement, resulting in inaccurate reporting.  Once the 6th Circuit found that there was no breach, the Court of Appeals found that no FCRA claim… Read More

1 2 3 4 5 6 17