Furnisher Reinvestigation

In Morse v. USAA Federal Sav. Bank, 2012 WL 6020090 (D.Nev. 2012), Judge Dawson addressed a common credit reporting issue arising out of a dispute between former spouses over a credit card account.  The Plaintiff, the ex-wife, was an authorized user of a USAA Federal Savings Bank credit card initially issued to her former husband. Morse was divorced on March… Read More

In Fregoso v. Wells Fargo Dealer Services, Inc., 2012 WL 4903291 (C.D.Cal. 2012), Judge Otero allowed a FCRA identity theft case to go to the jury against a third party debt collector.  As to the identity theft claim under FCRA, Judge Otero found that no FTC Affidavit of Theft was required: PCC argues that if Plaintiff is a victim of… Read More

In Drew v. Equifax Information Services, LLC --- F.3d ----, 2012 WL 3186110 (9th Cir. 2012), the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that a furnisher could have violated its statutory duty under FCRA to block all reporting following its investigation of the consumer's identity theft claim.  A consumer had reported to a credit bureau that his identity had… Read More

In Cousineau v. Unifund CCR Partners, 2012 WL 3135687 (D.Colo. 2012), Judge Arguello held that a Plaintiff still must demonstrate factual inaccuracy of a credit report regardless of how well a furnisher re-investigates a consumer dispute. Plaintiff contends that Defendant's investigations were unreasonable because Defendant failed to discover documents from Chase showing that Plaintiff asked to be removed from the… Read More

In Corby v. American Exp. Co., 2011 WL 4625719 (C.D.Cal. 2011), Judge Wright found that, under Nelson, a consumer can only recover under FCRA for a section 1681s-2(b) claim – meaning, the consumer must first dispute the claim with the credit reporting agency.  Judge Wright as a corollary therefore held that a consumer can not recover for wrongful or inaccurate… Read More

In Boggio v. USAA Federal Sav. Bank, 2011 WL 3876525 (S.D.Ohio 2011), Judge Weber found a credit union’s re-investigation reasonable under FCRA where the Plaintiff claimed that the vehicle purchase contract on which he was a co-buyer was procured without his consent, explaining:   “[D]istrict courts that have considered the issue have consistently recognized that the creditor's investigation must be… Read More

In Edeh v. Midland Credit Management, Inc., here, the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit issued a short opinion affirming the district court's summary judgement motion, holding that a furnisher of information need investigate only what is contained in the CRA’s dispute notice as to the nature of the dispute. We previously had reported on the district Court's opinion in October… Read More

In Anderson v. EMC Mortg. Corp., --- F.3d ----, 2011 WL 409095 (8th Cir. 2011), the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit held that a furnisher did not violate FCRA by failing to re-investigate a purported inaccuracy as to which month an account was past due on.  The Court of Appeals held that the Plaintiff had failed to notify… Read More

In Edeh v. Midland Credit Management, Inc. (D. Minn. 2010) , Judge Schiltz found that a debt collector does not violate the FDCPA by reporting an account to the Credit Reporting Agencies after a debtor demands validation without first validating the debt, explaining The Court rejects Edeh’s argument that a debt collector who, before verifying a disputed debt to a consumer,… Read More

In Chaing v. Verizon New England, Inc. – F.3d --, 2010 WL 431873 (1st Cir. 2010), the Court of Appeals for the First Circuit affirmed summary judgment in favor of Verizon based on its reinvestigation under FCRA, explaining:     This leaves the question of the extent of a furnisher's investigation obligation under § 1681s-2(b). The statute does not define… Read More

The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit re-issued its Gorman decision, following re-hearing petitions filed by industry, with mere commentary in footnotes.  With these amendments, the panel unanimously has voted to deny Appellant’s petition for rehearing en banc and Appellee’s petition for panel rehearing and petition for rehearing en banc.  The full court has been advised of the petitions… Read More

On July 1, and effective July 1, 2010, July 1, 2009 Inter-agency FACTA Rule 974 Fed. Reg. 31484 (2009) was issued defining the obligations imposed on furnishers of credit reporting information.   The history behind the July 1, 2009 Inter-Agency Rule is as follows. FACTA and Implementing Regulations   On December 4, 2003, Congress passed the Fair and Accurate Transactions Act, which amended the… 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

In Zimmerman v. Bank of America, , 2009 WL 418606 (N.D.Miss 2009), Judge Mills ruled on what constitutes a “reasonable investigation” by a furnisher after it receives a consumer dispute verification from a credit reporting agency which gives notification of such dispute by the consumer.  Judge Mills found the question of “reasonableness” best left to Mississippi juries.    The Fifth… 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