A rundown of recent top FCRA, TCPA and FDCPA cases from ACA.
04/28/2023 3:00 P.M.
4.5 minute read
Each week, ACA International’s compliance team covers relevant case summaries for ACA members. Members may also submit cases for consideration to our compliance team at [email protected].
Here are the cases covered April 25 – 28:
April 25:
Bueno v. Experian: Court Finds No Standing Because Credit Reporting Error Did Not Injure Plaintiff
An Illinois district court found that a plaintiff did not have standing to pursue her FCRA claims because the CRA’s failure to accurately list an account as discharged in bankruptcy was actually beneficial to her credit profile.
Continue reading the case summary here.
Rana v. Equifax: Court Remands FCRA Action Lacking Allegations of Concrete Injury
A New York district court found that a lowered credit score in and of itself is not a concrete harm sufficient to establish a basis for Article III standing.
Continue reading the case summary here.
Stephenson-Ortiz v. Simon’s Agency: Court Finds Consumer’s Claim of a Lowered Credit Score is Not a Concrete Harm
A consumer received a collection letter claiming she owed a debt. The consumer claimed she did not owe the debt at the time the letter was sent out and claimed that it lowered her credit score when the debt collector reported the debt to the CRAs. The consumer sued the debt collector, who moved for summary judgment.
Continue reading the case summary here.
April 26:
Herskovic v. Verizon Wireless: Court Refuses to Vacate Arbitrator’s Judgment
A consumer was compelled to arbitrate his claim that his cellular provider wrongfully attempted to collect an early termination fee from him. Despite the fact that the arbitrator ruled in his favor concerning the termination fee, the consumer tried to vacate the arbitrator’s opinion as he was denied damages.
Continue reading the summary here.
Hickson v. Experian: Court Finds Continued Reporting of a Charged-Off Debt Does Not Violate the FCRA
Joining a growing list of courts, an Oregon district court held that reporting a charge-off over multiple months is neither patently incorrect nor misleading and does not violate FCRA.
Continue reading the summary here.
Pascal v. Concentra: 9th Circuit Affirms California Decision That Text Message Was Not Sent by Autodialer
A company that manually added phone numbers to a database and assigned the phone numbers an ID number in a sequential, ascending order based on the time an employee input the cell number did not store or produce randomly or sequentially generated telephone numbers and so did not use an autodialer to send a text message in violation of the TCPA.
Continue reading the summary here.
April 27:
White v. Resurgent: Court Finds Verification Was Sufficient to Satisfy the FDCPA
A court found that the account summary provided by the defendant was more than adequate to satisfy the requirement to verify a debt under Section 1692g of the FDCPA.
Continue reading the summary here.
Higley v. Newrez: Court Dismisses FCRA Claims After Furnisher Corrects Report
A court found that a consumer failed to state a claim for relief under the FCRA where his allegations showed that the company corrected inaccurate information in the consumer’s credit report, and the consumer did not allege that the company’s investigation into the inaccurate information was unreasonable or cursory.
Continue reading the summary here.
Luft v. WebBank: Court Finds Consumer Stated a Claim for Failure to Investigate a Dispute Under the FCRA
A consumer claimed that a data furnisher furnished inaccurate information about her account to a CRA. The consumer disputed the date of activity on her account to the CRA and the date was later changed, but the change was inaccurate. The consumer sued the data furnisher for failing to investigate her dispute.
Continue reading the summary here.
April 28:
Konig v. Transunion: Consumer With Excellent Credit After Statutory Violation of FCRA Lacked Standing for Legal Claims
Given that a lowered credit score in and of itself is not a concrete harm sufficient to establish standing for claims based on the FCRA, a consumer who continued to have an excellent credit score and obtained a new loan could not show a sufficient injury to establish standing based on allegations of a statutory violation arising from a company’s reporting information beyond seven years.
Continue reading the summary here.
Bertolino v. Sequium Asset Solutions: Lack of Interest Disclosure in Settlement Offer is Not Misleading Under the FDCPA
A Massachusetts district court held that a collection letter that offers to settle a debt for a sum certain is not required to disclose that interest is accruing on the debt.
Continue reading the summary here.
Ward v. NPAS: 6th Circuit Holds Account Servicer Was Not a Debt Collector Under the FDCPA
A consumer sued a servicer under the FDCPA. A court found that the consumer did not have Article III standing to bring his claims. On remand, the consumer amended his complaint and added documents to the record to show he had suffered a concrete harm. The district court then concluded that those changes were sufficient to demonstrate his standing but that he could not prevail on the merits because the servicer was not a debt collector in the meaning of the FDCPA. The consumer appealed the decision.
Continue reading the summary here.
Visit the Industry Advancement Fund webpage for more Daily Decision recaps and compliance resources.
If you’ve recently obtained a judicial opinion that might benefit other ACA members, email it to us: [email protected].
- Join the discussion on legal and compliance topics with your fellow members on the Members Attorney Program community on The Hub. Simply log on to The Hub and select Members Attorney Program under the Communities menu.
- ACA’s Daily Decision is powered by ACA’s Litigation Advocacy and Compliance Teams.
