Custom Search

Wednesday, June 10, 2009

New FCRA case regarding 15 U.S.C. 1681e(b)

New case regarding the Fair Credit Reporting Act from the Federal Court for the District of Columbia. Wilson v. Prudential Financial, et al., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26483 (D. DC March 30, 2009).

Defendant CARCO Group, Inc. (“CARCO”), a consumer reporting agency that does background checks on consumers, prepared a background report on Plaintiff Derek T. Wilson for Prudential Financial Services (“Prudential”) related to Plaintiff’s offer of employment with Prudential. The background report’s criminal history section listed a criminal charge as "pending". Based on the erroneous background report, Prudential withdrew the Plaintiff's job offer. CARCO amended the background report on Plaintiff and sent it to Prudential indicating that Plaintiff had no past or pending criminal charges but Prudential refused to re-extend the offer.

Plaintiff sued CARCO alleging that CARCO violated 15 U.S.C. 1681e(b) of the Fair Credit Report Act which requires consumer reporting agencies to use reasonable procedures to assure the maximum possible accuracy of the consumer reports they create. CARCO filed a motion for summary judgment seeking dismissal of the lawsuit because the Plaintiff had not provided sufficient evidence to establish the elements of his 15 U.S.C. 1681e(b) claim.

The court denied Defendant’s motion, finding that the Plaintiff had present sufficient proof that the Defendant failed to follow reasonable procedures to assure the maximum possible accuracy of the consumer report regarding the Plaintiff. Plaintiff's evidence created a material question of fact that only the jury could decide.

Overall, a good result and a well rationed opinion from the Court.

No comments:

Post a Comment