Skip to Content (Press Enter)

Skip to Nav (Press Enter)

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 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

In Felts v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 2018 WL 3130674 (11th Cir. 2018), the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit found that a Bank’s reporting of a mortgage account in forbearance as ‘past due’ did not violate the FCRA.  The Court of Appeals imposed a causation requirement on an FCRA re-investigation claim, namely that the (un)reasonableness of a re-investigation… Read More

In Shaw v. Experian Information Systems, 2018 DJDAR 4948, 2018 WL 2424105 (9th Cir. May 29, 2018), the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that Experian’s reporting of Plaintiffs’ short sales during the real estate market crash between 2008 to 2012 to subscribers of credit information did not violate 15 U.S.C.§ 1681e or § 1681i of the FCRA… Read More

In Nissou-Rabban v. Capital One Bank (USA), N.A., 2018 WL 538962, at *6 (S.D.Cal., 2018), Judge Houston found that an FCRA plaintiff whose credit card account has passed through bankruptcy sufficiently alleged an "inaccuracy" under the FCRA and that such claim could proceed as a class action.  After allowing the Plaintiff to amend the Complaint to allege a class action, the… Read More

In Dacumos v. Toyota Motor Credit Corporation, 2017 WL 6406137, at *4–5 (W.D.Wash., 2017), Judge Martinez found that dismissal of a state court collection action by itself did not vitiate the debt and require the creditor to report the balance as "0". Plaintiff contends that because TMCC dismissed the collection case against her in King County Superior Court, that dismissal acts… Read More

In Leones v. Rushmore Loan Management Services, LLC, 2017 WL 6343622, at *3 (S.D.Fla., 2017), Judge Dimitrouleas dismissed an FCRA class action because the information reported was not inaccurate in the first instance. Here, the reported information regarding Plaintiff's mortgage loan account—that it was 120 days or more delinquent and that foreclosure proceedings were initiated—was both accurate and complete. The Court… Read More

In Kunwar v. Capital One, N.A., 2017 WL 5991864, at *3–6 (N.D.Cal., 2017), Judge Koh allowed an FCRA claim past the pleading stage based on the argument that reporting a debt that was "cancelled" by issuance of a 1099-C rendered the reporting inaccurate. Plaintiff's complaint alleges that Defendant reported an unpaid balance in Plaintiff's account with Defendant to the CRAs,… Read More

In Paul Gugger, Plaintiff, v. USAA Federal Savings Bank, Defendant., 2017 WL 5552254, at *2–4 (S.D.Cal., 2017), the District Court denied a motion to dismiss a credit reporting complaint premised on the theory that a 1099-C discharged a debt, making reporting of the balance of the debt inaccurate. The Internal Revenue Code requires a creditor discharging indebtedness to file an “information… Read More

In Mamisay, et. al. v. TD Bank USA, et. al., 2017 WL 3387476, at *3–4 (N.D.Cal. Aug. 7, 2017), Judge Gonzalez-Rogers dismissed some claims but allowed some to proceed under the FCRA. As analyzed in the Court's prior ruling, the reporting of balances due, or past due, does not constitute an “actual inaccuracy” simply because a bankruptcy proceeding is pending. Biggs… Read More

In Keller v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc., 2017 WL 130285, at *6–8 (N.D.Cal., 2017), Judge Koh dismissed a FCRA plaintiff's argument that her creditor's reporting of an account during bankruptcy was inaccurate. Experian and Wells Fargo argue Plaintiff's FAC must be dismissed because Plaintiff fails to identify any inaccurate or misleading statements in Plaintiff's credit report. In response, Plaintiff argues… Read More

In Mestayer v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc, 2016 WL 7188015, at *3 (N.D.Cal., 2016), Judge Chen dismissed an FCRA case based on a furnisher's post-bankruptcy reporting. Even assuming that deviating from Metro 2 could be misleading (and hence actionable, see Gorman, 584 F.3d at 1163) when the underlying information is accurate, the TAC fails to adequately allege that CapOne's reporting… Read More

In Baker v. American Financial Services, Inc., 2016 WL 4030964, at *3 (W.D.Ky., 2016), Judge Stivers allowed an FCRA claim to proceed where the debtor claimed that the reporting of a debt was inaccurate because a 1099-C Form filed by the auto finance lender stated that the debt had been discharged by agreement of the parties. The parties urge the… Read More

In Pagazani v. Equifax Information Services, LLC, 2016 WL 2997586, at *5-6 (S.D.Fla., 2016), Judge Bloom granted summary judgment to a consumer reporting agency against a debtor who claimed that the bank's furnishing of information to the CRA was inaccurate because he had a defense to the underlying debt itself -- namely, that he was only an "authorized user" on… Read More

In Jackson v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc., et. al., 2016 WL 2910027, at *3-5 (N.D.Ill., 2016), Judge Kennelly found that a Chapter 13 debtor stated a claim that a loan servicer's post-Chapter 13 bankruptcy reporting remained inaccurate even after the furnisher made corrections because it did not correct all the inaccuracies in the consumer's report. In count 2 of his complaint, Jackson… Read More

In Mestayer v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc, 2016 WL 631980, at *1 (N.D.Cal., 2016), Judge Chen dismissed a Plaintiff's FCRA/CCRAA claims grounded in credit reporting during bankruptcy proceedings. On or about November 25, 2013, Ms. Mestayer filed for bankruptcy in the Northern District of California. On or about April 20, 2014, she received a bankruptcy discharge. During the bankruptcy proceedings, Ms.… Read More

In Abeyta v. Bank of America, N.A., 2016 WL 304308, at *2 (D.Nev., 2016), Judge Jones found that a bank's reporting, post-discharge, of a consumer's pre-petition debt as being in default, did not violate the FCRA because the report was not inaccurate.  The facts were as follows. Plaintiff Ginney Abeyta filed for bankruptcy in this District in June 2010. (Compl.… Read More

In Brill v. TransUnion, 2015 WL 9095103, at *1-2 (W.D.Wis. 2015), Judge Crocker dismissed a FCRA claim against TransUnion arising out of a vehicle co-lessee’s claims that the primary lessee forged his signature on a lease extension and then defaulted on it. The facts, apparently, arising out of a failed relationship, are not all that uncommon. On or about May… Read More

1 2 3 4