Photo of Cindy D. Hanson

Cindy D. Hanson

Subscribe to Cindy D. Hanson's Posts

Consumer finance clients trust Cindy’s experience and skill to resolve their most challenging cases. Focused on class action defense, Cindy has handled numerous FCRA cases and is the point of contact for consumer protection defense.

Follow:Read more about Cindy D. HansonCindy's Linkedin Profile

In Holden v. Holiday Inn Club Vacations Inc., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently upheld a consolidated district court ruling granting summary judgment for the defendant furnisher in two Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) actions centering on whether the consumers’ disputes with the furnisher were actionable. While the Eleventh Circuit declined to impose a bright-line rule that only FCRA claims based on factual disputes are actionable, it affirmed the district courts’ summary judgment ruling, finding that for consumer disputes to be actionable against furnishers, the alleged inaccuracy must be “objectively and readily verifiable.”

On May 2, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) released two sets of guidance addressing the applicability of the Fair Housing Act (FHA) to two areas where, in the agency’s view, algorithmic processes and artificial intelligence (AI) pose particular concerns: tenant screening and advertising of housing opportunities through online platforms that use targeted ads. The purpose of HUD’s guidance is to make housing providers, tenant screening companies, advertisers, and online platforms aware that the FHA applies to tenant screening and housing advertising, including when algorithms and AI are used to perform those functions.

Recently, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) submitted letters to senators in Connecticut and California supporting their proposals to prohibit medical debt reporting.

In this episode of FCRA Focus, hosts Kim Phan and Dave Gettings are joined by Partners Cindy Hanson and Ron Raether to discuss recent CFPB advisory opinions on accuracy in background check reports and the inclusion of data sources in response to consumer file disclosure requests. They delve into the challenges companies face in obtaining accurate information from public record sources and the implications of the CFPB’s guidance for the industry. The conversation also highlights the importance of effective dispute processes and vendor relationships in ensuring compliance. Tune in for insightful commentary on these critical issues in the FCRA compliance environment.

Join hosts Dave Gettings, Kim Phan, and Chris Willis in this special crossover episode of FCRA Focus and The Consumer Finance Podcast in the first installment of our Year in Review and a Look Ahead series. They are joined by guests Cindy Hanson and Alan Wingfield, partners at Troutman Pepper, who share their insights on the most impactful developments in background screening and credit reporting in 2023. Listen in as they discuss industry challenges and opportunities, the implications of proposed regulatory changes, and what to expect in the future. Stay tuned for the next episode of our Year in Review and a Look Ahead series on The Consumer Finance Podcast, providing valuable insights for anyone involved in consumer finance.

Join hosts Dave Gettings, Kim Phan, and Chris Willis in this special crossover episode of FCRA Focus and The Consumer Finance Podcast in the first installment of our Year in Review and a Look Ahead series. They are joined by guests Cindy Hanson and Alan Wingfield, partners at Troutman Pepper, who share their insights on the most impactful developments in background screening and credit reporting in 2023. Listen in as they discuss industry challenges and opportunities, the implications of proposed regulatory changes, and what to expect in the future. Stay tuned for the next episode of our Year in Review and a Look Ahead series on The Consumer Finance Podcast, providing valuable insights for anyone involved in consumer finance.

In Career Counseling, Inc. v. Amerifactors Financial Group, LLC, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit upheld a district court’s decision denying class certification in a Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) case on the basis that the plaintiff failed to satisfy Rule 23’s “implicit further requirement of ascertainability.” The Fourth Circuit also upheld summary judgment against the defendant as to the individual claim finding the defendant was indeed the “sender” of the fax at issue. Each finding is discussed more fully below.

We are pleased to share our annual review of regulatory and legal developments in the consumer financial services industry. With active federal and state legislatures, consumer financial services providers faced a challenging 2023. Courts across the country issued rulings that will have immediate and lasting impacts on the industry. Our team of more than 140 professionals has prepared this concise, yet thorough analysis of the most important issues and trends throughout our industry. We not only examined what happened in 2023, but also what to expect — and how to prepare — for the months ahead.

Please join Troutman Pepper Partner Dave Gettings and colleagues Tim St. George and Cindy Hanson for a highly informative discussion on federal preemption as it relates to state laws and the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). This episode provides listeners with an overview of important state and local legislation governing background screening, along with discussions about how federal preemption might affect required compliance with these state and local laws. Topics include:

On January 11, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) issued two “advisory opinions” addressing the CFPB’s views of the obligations of consumer reporting agencies (CRAs) under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). The advisory opinions are interpretive rules issued under the Bureau’s authority to interpret the FCRA pursuant to § 1022(b)(1) of the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010.