Wyndo Posted December 9, 2002 Report Share Posted December 9, 2002 Something I noticed in this thread:http://www.debt-consolidation-credit-repair-service.com/cgi-local/cutecast/cutecast.pl?forum=1&thread=1875Two of his cases were thrown out (one regarding disputed inquiries, in which Trans Union didn't even show up to court) because (according to him, according to the judges) you can't use small claims to file over violations of the FCRA. This is exactly the opposite of what I've understood all along. Any comments or advice about that?From section 618 in the FCRA:§ 618. Jurisdiction of courts; limitation of actions [15 U.S.C. § 1681p]"An action to enforce any liability created under this title may be brought in any appropriate United States district court without regard to the amount in controversy, or in any other court of competent jurisdiction, within two years from the date on which the liability arises, except that where a defendant has materially and willfully misrepresented any information required under this title to be disclosed to an individual and the information so misrepresented is material to the establishment of the defendant's liability to that individual under this title, the action may be brought at any time within two years after discovery by the individual of the misrepresentation."This has to be the important piece of info. Translation, anybody? Is this specifically excluding small claims court as being not of competent jurisdiction?[Edit by Wyndo on Monday, December 9, 2002 @ 01:46 PM] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
admin Posted December 10, 2002 Report Share Posted December 10, 2002 No way - small claims is perfectly acceptable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
georgiaboy Posted December 10, 2002 Report Share Posted December 10, 2002 Maybe the small claims judges feel as if there not competent, and therefor they dont have jurisdiction??? :notsure: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyndo Posted December 10, 2002 Author Report Share Posted December 10, 2002 If it wasn't acceptable, it seems like it would be far too difficult (and not worth the effort) to even go after a $1,000 violation. But, Trans Union is sure being smug for some reason, having no fear of a small claims suit at all. Why would this guy's cases have been dismissed as being in the wrong court?I'm going to call a lawyer on Thursday and see if I can get some more info. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
admin Posted December 10, 2002 Report Share Posted December 10, 2002 The money is just an added bonus, what you are really trying for is a deletion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anonymous Posted December 12, 2002 Report Share Posted December 12, 2002 The problem with filing in small claims court is this:The FCRA and FDCPA grant the consumer the ability to BRING a cause of action in any court of competent jurisdiction. The FCRA and FDCPA do NOT grant that same consumer the ability to MAINTAIN a cause of action in the same court.Further, the judges in the small claims courts are not very knowledgable about federal laws or even state laws per say because small claims is kinda like a court of common sense so to speak.Also, the small claims judges may have felt that there was no personal jurisdiction (a difficult topic for many judges and lawyers to comprehend) over the defendant.---filing a suit in small claims court is more for the nuisance effect than anything else... what we really want is a settlement (and I think the CRA's know this). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts