Inaccuracy

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 Rydholm v. Equifax Info. Servs. LLC, No. 20-3425, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 22691, at *5-7 (8th Cir. Aug. 16, 2022), the Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit held that the FCRA's standards applicable to the CRAs are not strict liability. "CRAs must look beyond information furnished to them when it is inconsistent with [their] own records, contains a… Read More

In Riser v. Cent. Portfolio Control, Inc., 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 109545, Case No. 3:21-cv-05238-LK (W.D. Wash. June 21, 2022), Judge King dismissed an FCRA claim against a consumer reporting agency over the propriety of reporting a medical debt which the Plaintiff claimed that she did not owe because she was covered by Washington's Medicaid plan. Relying on the Ninth… Read More

Smith v. Trans Union LLC, No. 20-4233, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 198812 (E.D. Pa. Oct. 14, 2021), Judge Savage dismissed an FCRA case premised on an alleged inconsistency in reporting an account as closed with a zero balance but also a past due balance. The issue in these Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) actions is whether a consumer reporting agency's… Read More

In  Bruce v. Am. Honda Fin. Corp., No. 3:20-cv-00128-ECM, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 107187, at *9 (M.D. Ala. June 8, 2021), Judge Marks ruled against a FCRA Plaintiff on the claim that identification of the amount monthly payment on a closed, zero-balanced account is "inaccurate" and suggests to users that the account is open. Now pending before the Court is… Read More

In Layton v. Experian Info. Sols., Inc., No. 4:20-cv-00029-DN-PK, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 205221, at *2-3 (D. Utah Nov. 2, 2020), Judge Nuffer found no inaccuracy in the way that Discover was reporting the Plaintiff's bankrupt account. Layton sent a letter, certified, return receipt, to Experian disputing and requesting the above inaccurate information be removed as follows: "Immediately correct this… Read More

In Hammer v. Equifax Info. Servs., No. 19-10199, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 28800 (5th Cir. Sep. 9, 2020), the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that no claim arose under the FCRA for failure to report a trade line in the consumer’s consumer report. Hammer alleges that Equifax violated the FCRA because it had favorable information about his… Read More

  In Zablocki v. Merchs. Credit Guide Co., No. 19-2045, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 23737 (7th Cir. July 28, 2020), the Court of Appeals dismissed an FDCPA claim premised on a debt collectors failure to aggregate debts into a single account when reporting to the CRAs. Viewing Merchants's separate reporting of debts from the perspective of an unsophisticated but reasonable… Read More

In Holland v. Chase Bank United States, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 133642 (S.D.N.Y. July 28, 2020), Judge Engelmayer dismissed an FCRA claim against a Furnisher for absence of an “inaccuracy”, holding that Plaintiff’s claim that the debt was extinguished by the statute of limitations did not render the reporting of the debt inaccurate. Here, Holland asserts that Chase's furnishing of… Read More

In Chuluunbat v. Cavalry Portfolio Servs., LLC, No. 20 C 164, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 128931 (N.D. Ill. July 22, 2020), Judge Kocoras granted a furnisher’s motion to dismiss an FCRA claim. Given these letters, Cavalry argues that it was required to do nothing further than what it had already done to comply with its obligations under Section 1681s-2(b). Chuluunbat… Read More

In Krosch v. Equifax Info. Servs., LLC, No. 19-CV-2784 (NEB/KMM), 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99150, at *5-9 (D. Minn. June 5, 2020), Judge Brasel held that a consumer stated no FCRA claim against a CRA due to the CRA's alleged failure not to report all furnishers' tradelines. Experian argues that the Complaint fails to allege either of these elements because… Read More

In Denan v. Trans Union LLC, No. 19-1519, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 14930 (7th Cir. May 11, 2020), the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit held that a CRA, under the guise of determining accuracy, was not obligated to adjudicate the consumer claims that the debt was not valid. Here, plaintiffs contend not only that Trans Union had a… 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 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 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 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 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

In Garcia v. Equifax Info. Servs. LLC, No. 2:17-cv-03123-JAD-VCF, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 58217, at *2-5 (D. Nev. Apr. 4, 2019), Judge Dorsey granted a motion to dismiss, rejecting an FCRA plaintiff's claim that no inaccuracy was required. Under FCRA, a credit reporting agency (CRA) must "conduct a reasonable reinvestigation" upon receiving a dispute notice from a consumer concerning the… Read More

In Garland v. Marine Credit Union, 2018 WL 5313769, at *3–4 (E.D.Wis., 2018), Judge Griesbach dismissed an FCRA claim on the basis that there was no inaccuracy. Plaintiff claims that Defendants violated the FCRA by failing to conduct a reasonable investigation of the disputed Marine and World debts and refusing to correct the inaccurate information contained in her credit report.… Read More

In Thomas v. Hyundai Capital America, et. al., 2018 WL 4899074, at *3–4 (D.Colo., 2018), Magistrate Judge Mix dismissed an FCRA claim against a CRA. The Equifax Defendants argue that Plaintiff’s claim fails because he cannot establish element two, i.e. that the report in question was, in fact, inaccurate. Motion [#10] at 5. They assert that “it is undisputed that… Read More

1 2 3 4