In Mack v. Equable Ascent Financial, L.L.C., the Fifth Circuit ruled the consumer’s suit was barred under the Fair Credit Reporting Act’s two-year statute of limitations. Rejecting the plaintiff’s claim that the statute does not begin to run when the consumer discovers the facts that constitute the legal violation, the Court of Appeals held
CFPB Director Discusses Perceived Benefits of Public Complaint Database
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has announced an initiative to allow consumers to contribute a public “narrative of their own experiences” when posting to the CFPB’s Consumer Complaint Database. We discussed the creation of this narrative section in our July 18 blog titled “CFPB Adds Narrative to Complaint Database.” Recently, Richard Cordray, Director
Amicus Briefs Join the Push for Supreme Court Review of “No Injury” Class Actions
On May 1, 2014, Spokeo, Inc. filed a writ of certiorari in the United States Supreme Court requesting the Court decide whether a plaintiff has Article III standing in a federal court when he or she has suffered no actual harm besides the violation of a statute alone. Resolution of this question could have a
Spokeo Brings “No Concrete Harm” FCRA Fight to the Supreme Court
On May 1, 2014, Spokeo, Inc. petitioned the United States Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari to decide a significant question regarding Article III standing applicable to numerous federal consumer protection statutes. Specifically, Spokeo asked the Supreme Court to weigh in on whether Congress can confer Article III standing to sue upon a plaintiff
CFPB Succumbs to Pressure, Opens Advisory Board and Council Meetings to Public
Beginning in June, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau will provide the public with access to the meetings of the Consumer Advisory Board (CAB)and the CFPB’s three Councils. Anyone may attend or watch the full meetings live online the same way most other agencies allow under the Federal Advisory Committee Act.
As we previously discussed,
Sixth Circuit Affirms Dismissal of FCRA Permissible Purpose Claim Even Though Plaintiff Did Not Initiate Transaction
In Bickley v. Dish Network, the Sixth Circuit on May 13, 2014 affirmed the dismissal of a claim for violating the Fair Credit Reporting Act for accessing a credit report without a permissible purpose. Dish Network accessed the plaintiff’s credit report to investigate whether the person attempting to order satellite television service using plaintiff’s
FTC Settles Claims Against Data Brokers Under FCRA
Two data brokers settled charges brought by the FTC for $1.5 million based on allegations that they violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) when selling consumer data.
The FTC alleged the companies operated as consumer reporting agencies when providing reports about consumers to users such as prospective employers and landlords. The complaints filed by
FTC and EEOC Issue Guidance on FCRA and Background Checks
Hiring decisions are among the most important choices for any employer, but the process can be complex. For the first time, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) have jointly issued two short guides on employment background checks that explain the rights and responsibilities of both employers and employees, while
FTC Commissioner Advocates for New Data Broker Legislation
In a lecture at Princeton University last week entitled “Big Data and Consumer Privacy: Addressing Challenges and Finding Solutions,” the Federal Trade Commission’s Julie Brill joined others in calling for Congress to enact new legislation covering data brokers, in particular to improve commercial privacy laws regarding how and what personal information is collected.
Commissioner Brill
Third Circuit Exposes Furnishers to Significant FCRA Liability
In a published opinion on February 21, 2014, a unanimous panel of the Third Circuit in Seamans v. Temple University held that, even if information provided by a furnisher in response to a consumer’s dispute received from a consumer reporting agency (CRA) is technically correct, it may nonetheless be inaccurate in violation of the Fair