FCRA Damages

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 Nelson v. Mortgage, No. 19-01005-WS-B, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 222396 (S.D. Ala. Nov. 25, 2020), the District Court granted summary judgment to a mortgage company on an FCRA claim. Nationstar counters, however, that plaintiffs have made no showing that any such emotional distress damages resulted from the alleged FCRA violation, which is a legal requirement of the claim. See,… Read More

In Denton v. JPMorgan Chase & Co., No. 4:19cv114, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 185745 (E.D. Va. Oct. 6, 2020), Judge Davis allowed an FCRA to proceed due to Plaintiff’s allegation of emotional distress. Plaintiff's fourth count alleges that Chase violated 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(b) either willfully/recklessly or negligently by failing "to properly investigate Plaintiff's dispute" and failing "to correct the… Read More

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 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

It’s in quotations by design.  In Shepard v. Equifax Info. Servs., LLC, No. 2:17-cv-01118-KJM-CKD, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60814 (E.D. Cal. Apr. 9, 2019), Judge Mueller held that a consumer’s declaration that he was told his credit was and/or would be denied was sufficient to survive summary judgment. The FCRA permits a plaintiff to recover actual damages for a CRA's… Read More

In Gadomski v. Equifax Information Services, Inc., 2018 WL 2096862, at *4–6 (E.D.Cal., 2018), the District Court found that no willful violation of the CRA could lie absent prior notice that the information was inaccurate or that the information came from an unreliable source.  Here, Defendant does not dispute that the information reported on Plaintiff’s credit report was inaccurate. (See ECF… Read More

In Hogue v. Allied Collection Service, Inc., 2018 WL 771321, at *4–5 (D.Nev., 2018), the District Court granted summary judgment to an auto finance company who was sued for the way that it reported, and then reinvestigated, an automobile account after a debtor filed Chapter 13. Silver State argues that it is undisputed that plaintiff's auto account was delinquent on… Read More

In Contreras v. Kohl's Department Stores, Inc., 2017 WL 6372646, at *3 (C.D.Cal., 2017), Judge Kato denied production of settlement agreements amongst FCRA co-defendants. Defendant argues the settlement agreements are necessary to determine (a) “whether Plaintiff has been fully compensated for his alleged injuries,” and (b) “the reasonableness of an attorney fee award should Plaintiff prevail on his claims.” JS at… Read More

In Daugherty v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, 2017 WL 3172422, (4th Cir. July 24, 2017), the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the jury's finding of improper reinvestigation and willfulness against a furnisher, but found the punitive damages award to be constitutionally excessive. We must affirm the district court's judgment regarding Ocwen's liability for willful misconduct if there was sufficient… Read More

In Turner v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc., 2017 WL 2832738, at *6 (N.D.Ohio, 2017), Judge Zouhary found no recoverable FCRA damages. Turner concedes her damages are limited to emotional distress (Doc. 21 at ¶ 62). . . Turner testified that a mortgage broker advised her in early 2015—several months before the July 2015 dispute letter that forms the basis for this lawsuit—that… Read More

In Boyd v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 2016 WL 7323293, at *6–9 (S.D.Ga., 2016), Judge Wood found that a Furnisher's reinvestigation of a FCRA dispute was reasonable and that the Plaintiff had suffered no damages.    Boyd is a nuclear submarine missile technician, who executed a power of attorney authorizing his then-wife, Siana Boyd, “to borrow money and to execute in… Read More

In Bacharach v. Suntrust Mortgage, Incorporated, 2016 WL 3568059, at *1-2 (C.A.5 (La.), 2016), the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that the FCRA does not provide protection against commercial losses. Bacharach argues that due to SunTrust's alleged FCRA violations that resulted in the reporting of misinformation to various credit agencies, she was unable to purchase property at 2841… Read More

In Boydstun v. U.S. Bank National Association, N.D., 2016 WL 2736104, at *1 (D.Or., 2016), Judge Hernandez precluded Plaintiff's expert in a FCRA case from testifying about commercial losses because FCRA affords no remedy for them.  Plaintiff Robert Boydstun sought to introduce expert testimony about the economic damages he suffered after a failed attempt to secure financing for a forklift to be used… 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 Seungtae Kim v. BMW Financial Services NA, LLC, 2015 WL 6680911, at *2 (C.D.Cal., 2015), Judge O'Connell denied a new trial to an automobile finance company, against whom a $430,000 jury verdict was assessed.  The facts were as follows: On August 28, 2015, the jury rendered its unanimous verdict, finding in Plaintiff's favor on two of his three claims. (Judgment… 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 Collins v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc., --- F.3d ----, 2015 WL 55345 (11th Cir. 2015), the Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit held that a FCRA Plaintiff need not show an actual declination of credit in order to support an emotional distress claim under FCRA. Curtis J. Collins appeals the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of… Read More

1 2