The CFPB and the FTC recently filed an amicus brief in an appeal to the Second Circuit, arguing that the Court should reject the District Court’s “unduly narrow” interpretation of the FCRA requirement that consumer reporting agencies (CRAs) follow reasonable procedures to assure accuracy of information included in consumer reports.

In Sessa v. Trans Union

The Eighth Circuit reiterated in a decision last month that trial courts must distinguish between FCRA plaintiffs who have suffered concrete harm and plaintiffs who merely seek to collect statutorily allowed damages as a way to ensure compliance with the law.  Under the Supreme Court’s decision in Spokeo, the former have Article III standing

The Fourth Circuit heard argument earlier this week on whether Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act shields on-line data aggregator, PublicData.com, from FCRA liability in a putative class action dismissed last year by a federal judge in Virginia.  We previously blogged about the amicus brief filed in the appeal by the CFPB, FTC, and

In a rare development, a California state court of appeals has opined on the requirements for obtaining authorization for background checks pursuant to the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

In Hebert v. Barnes & Noble, Inc., the plaintiff filed a putative class action against retailer Barnes & Noble, contending it willfully violated the FCRA by

In Theresa Tailford, et al. v. Experian Information Solutions, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently affirmed a district court decision which held that Experian Information Solutions, Inc. did not violate the Fair Credit Reporting Act because none of the information the plaintiffs alleged Experian should have disclosed was subject to

To implement recent amendments to the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) has proposed a rule intended to assist survivors of trafficking. The rule would establish a way for survivors to submit documentation to consumer reporting agencies (CRAs) identifying any “adverse item of information” about the consumer resulting from human

A Pennsylvania district court has ruled that a company that provides reports based on a search of public records is a “consumer reporting agency” (CRA) as defined by the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

In McGrath v. Credit Lenders Service Agency, Inc., the plaintiffs applied to a bank for a loan to refinance their home

The CFPB has issued an advisory opinion that affirms that the use of “name-only matching” by consumer reporting agencies, including tenant and employment screening companies, does not satisfy the FCRA requirement for a CRA ”to follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information concerning the individual about whom the [consumer] report relates.”  

The CFPB, FTC, and the North Carolina Department of Justice filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit urging it to reverse a district court decision that found Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act made a consumer reporting agency immune from FCRA claims.

In Henderson v. The Source

The National Defense Authorization Act as passed by the House and now headed to the Senate includes amendments to the Fair Credit Reporting Act dealing with the reporting of adverse information on servicemembers by consumer reporting agencies.

The amendments add the defined terms “uniformed consumer” and “deployed uniformed consumer” to the FCRA.  A “uniformed consumer”