Jump to content

Keep Your Fingers Crossed

Recommended Posts

What they are deciding is rather nuanced, don't you think?

Not really.

"The issue that has broader ramifications is the Supreme Court’s interpretation of Section 1681n’s “willful noncompliance” standard. If the Supreme Court agrees with the Ninth Circuit’s standard for willful noncompliance, it will affect virtually all present and future FCRA litigation, because plaintiffs would be able to obtain statutory and punitive damages as long as they could show that a defendant acted in reckless disregard of the FCRA’s requirements."

Right now proving willfullness is a hard burden to meet and many Appeals Courts have different definition of willfullness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am keeping my fingers crossed on a positive verdict for the consumer. The FCRA is pretty straight forward and it is high time that big business is made to follow the law instead of interprete the law in a way different from Congresses intent! This is not rocket science.

We as consumers have no choice if a file is kept on us with a CRA or anyone for that matter. We are the 3rd party that really had no rights.... until the new FACTA law came into play.

Now for Bbg business to whine that they will face literally hundreds of millions and sometimes billions of dollars in liability is just too bad! They should have thought of that before destroying the consumers with bad reporting.

"The legal protections of the Fair Credit Reporting Act are really the primary way consumers can make sure their interests are protected,'' says Chi Chi Wu, a lawyer at the National Consumer Law Center in Boston."

Applause, Applause! This is just what we as consumers need, especially since we are now held to scoring. It is imperative that our credit reports be accurate. the only additional law we need is to be able to access our scores and dispute those too.

"The companies say their lawyers made a good-faith interpretation of the law -- one that was adopted by the trial judge who handled the cases"

This is the biggest boloney statement - they didn't pay their lawyers thousands of dollars to interpretate the law based on good faith - they paid to interpretate the law as to how they could do whatever and get away with it. Cap One is able to leave off credit limits that clearly lowers a consumer' score and that gives Cap one and every other Credit Furnisher the power to charge higher interest based on what really amounts to false reporting.

"Some 2,600 lawsuits alleging violations of the fair-credit law are pending in federal courts, according to a filing by State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. in a related case. Almost 1,000 of those were filed after the San Francisco-based 9th Circuit first ruled against the industry in 2005."

I am not sure if that is based on just these types are FCRA as a whole. I know for a fact that the number is going up on a daily basis as more consumers educate themselves on these issues. I also know more attorney's are taking on these cases and I am sure they are not taking them on for recretation purposes!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.