Case law updates
FCRA news and case law
The court decisions and rule changes shaping credit reporting and background check law since 2020. Each update links the opinion or rule itself, the commentary we reviewed, and our own take.
2026
De Koning v. Trans Union, LLCU.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh CircuitA consumer sued TransUnion for failing to give timely notice that it had reinserted previously deleted information, but he did not claim the information was inaccurate. The Eleventh Circuit held he lacked Article III standing because a late notice, without more, is a bare statutory violation, and it ordered dismissal without prejudice.Bultemeyer v. CenturyLink, Inc.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitCenturyLink pulled credit reports of online shoppers who stopped before the final step of placing an order, and a jury awarded the class more than $140 million for willful violations. The Ninth Circuit reversed, holding CenturyLink's reading of 'initiated by the consumer' was not objectively unreasonable under Safeco, so the violation could not be willful.Consumer Data Industry Association v. State of TexasU.S. District Court for the Western District of TexasJudge Robert Pitman held that 15 U.S.C. § 1681t(b)(1)(E) expressly preempts a Texas law barring credit bureaus from reporting certain out-of-network medical collections, and permanently enjoined its enforcement. He rejected the industry's broadest preemption theory but read § 1681c to cover all adverse information, including medical debt.Sykes v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh CircuitA consumer argued Experian misleadingly reported a mortgage balance alongside her Chapter 13 discharge and a deed in lieu of foreclosure. The Seventh Circuit affirmed dismissal, holding that whether the mortgage was discharged was a legal question beyond a bureau's duty under § 1681e(b).Ward v. National Credit Systems, Inc.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth CircuitThe Tenth Circuit held that a consumer suing a furnisher under § 1681s-2(b) must prove the reported information was actually inaccurate, and that the error was objectively and readily verifiable by the furnisher. It reversed a $500,000 jury verdict because the consumer's identity-theft claim rested on his own word against contrary evidence.RentGrow Pays $2.25M to Settle FTC Tenant Screening CaseFederal Trade Commission and U.S. Department of Justice (D.D.C.)The Justice Department, on referral from the FTC, sued tenant screening company RentGrow for duplicate criminal and eviction records, incomplete file disclosures, and disputes it labeled 'invalid' and ignored. RentGrow agreed to a $2.25 million civil penalty and an order requiring accuracy and dispute procedures.Fraase v. Advantage Credit BureauU.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth CircuitA background check put a job applicant's twin brother's speeding ticket on his report because the state court website listed him as the brother's alias. The Eighth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for the screening company, holding its reliance on an official court website was a reasonable procedure under § 1681e(b).Vermont Law Lets Coerced Debt Victims Clear Credit ReportsVermont General AssemblyVermont enacted H.385 (Act 106), which makes coerced debt incurred through domestic abuse, human trafficking, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult unenforceable once substantiated. Creditors and credit reporting agencies must investigate a survivor's documented claim and stop collection or remove the debt from the credit file.CFPB Rule Says ECOA Does Not Allow Disparate Impact ClaimsConsumer Financial Protection BureauThe CFPB amended Regulation B to state that the Equal Credit Opportunity Act does not authorize disparate-impact liability, deleting the long-standing 'effects test' language, including as applied to credit scoring factors. The rule also narrows the ban on discouraging applicants and restricts for-profit special purpose credit programs.Connecticut Fair Housing Center v. CoreLogic Rental Property Solutions, LLCU.S. Court of Appeals for the Second CircuitThe Second Circuit held the Fair Housing Act does not exempt tenant screening companies as a category, but found CoreLogic did not proximately cause a housing denial because the landlord controlled its screening criteria. It also reversed an FCRA judgment over CoreLogic's refusal to release a conserved son's file to his mother.Johnson v. Freedom Mortgage Corp.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth CircuitBorrowers disputed a 30-day late payment with letters saying only that they had paid on time. The Eighth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for Freedom Mortgage, holding a furnisher need investigate only what the bureau's notice tells it, and the servicer's review of the payment history was enough.Healy v. Milliman, Inc.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitIn a class action over mixed-up medical history reports sold to life insurers, the Ninth Circuit held that named and unnamed class members must produce evidence of Article III standing at summary judgment. It reversed the dismissal of the class because the district court wrongly demanded direct evidence when circumstantial evidence can create a triable issue.
2025
In re TransUnion, Trans Union LLC, and TransUnion Interactive, Inc.Consumer Financial Protection BureauThe CFPB terminated the October 2023 consent order that found TransUnion failed to timely place or lift security freezes and locks, told consumers requests had succeeded when they had not, and failed to keep fraud-alert consumers off prescreened marketing lists. TransUnion had paid a $5 million penalty and redress; the order was set to run at least five years. Earlier in 2025 the CFPB also dropped its separate lawsuit against TransUnion with prejudice.CFPB Says FCRA Broadly Preempts State Credit LawsConsumer Financial Protection BureauThe CFPB issued an interpretive rule stating that the FCRA generally preempts state laws touching broad areas of credit reporting, replacing a 2022 rule that read preemption narrowly. The Bureau specifically rejected the view that states may bar categories of information, such as medical debt, from credit reports.Migliore v. Vision Solar LLCU.S. Court of Appeals for the Third CircuitThe Third Circuit affirmed dismissal of FCRA and New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act claims against two solar lenders whose loan documents were allegedly forged by a door-to-door salesman. It held the 'credit transaction' permissible purpose in § 1681b(a)(3)(A) does not require that the consumer initiate the transaction, and the salesman's forgery could not be imputed to the lenders.Grijalva v. ADP Screening & Selection Services, Inc.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitThe Ninth Circuit held that a background check company could report a job applicant's ongoing exclusion from federal health care programs, but violated § 1681c(a)(5) by reporting that the exclusion stemmed from a nursing license revoked more than seven years earlier. It affirmed judgment for the company because its reading of the statute was not objectively unreasonable.Austin v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitThe Fourth Circuit reversed a refusal to compel arbitration, holding that a consumer who created a free CreditWorks account agreed to terms requiring arbitration of disputes with Experian affiliates, including his FCRA claims. A month earlier the Eleventh Circuit reached a similar result in Lamonaco and held that waiver of arbitration was for the arbitrator.Nelson v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh CircuitThe Eleventh Circuit held that a consumer who spent time and about $20 in postage trying to correct identifying information in her Experian file lacked standing, because the errors were never published to a third party or otherwise affected her. It vacated the judgment and remanded.Cornerstone Credit Union League v. Consumer Financial Protection BureauU.S. District Court for the Eastern District of TexasJudge Sean Jordan approved a consent judgment between the CFPB and industry trade groups and vacated the CFPB's medical debt rule in full, holding it violated the plain text of 15 U.S.C. § 1681b(a) and (g). The court entered the judgment over objections from intervening consumers and legal aid clinics.McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates, Inc. v. McKesson Corp.Supreme Court of the United StatesThe Supreme Court held 6-3 that the Hobbs Act does not bind district courts in civil enforcement proceedings to an agency's interpretation of a statute. Courts must decide the law's meaning themselves, affording appropriate respect to the agency's view.Reyes v. Equifax Information Services, L.L.C.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth CircuitThe Fifth Circuit held that inaccuracy is a threshold element of a § 1681i reinvestigation claim and that consumer reporting agencies are not required to investigate the legal validity of disputed debts. It affirmed summary judgment for Equifax on a claim over a charged-off Citibank balance the consumer said reflected fraudulent charges.Laboratory Corp. of America Holdings v. DavisSupreme Court of the United StatesThe Supreme Court agreed to decide whether a federal court may certify a damages class that includes both injured and uninjured members, then dismissed the case as improvidently granted after oral argument without deciding the question. Justice Kavanaugh dissented and would have held such classes cannot be certified. The Ninth Circuit's decision approving the class stands.Suluki v. Credit One Bank, N.A.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second CircuitThe Second Circuit affirmed summary judgment for Credit One on a § 1681s-2(b) claim by a consumer who said her mother opened a card in her name. Even assuming fraud, the court held no reasonable investigation would have led the bank to a different conclusion, and it found no evidence of willfulness or recoverable damages.CFPB Withdraws Proposed FCRA Data Broker RuleConsumer Financial Protection BureauThe CFPB withdrew its proposed rule, Protecting Americans from Harmful Data Broker Practices, which would have clarified when data brokers are consumer reporting agencies and restricted the sale of credit header data. The Bureau said the proposal did not align with its current interpretation of the FCRA and that it would take no further action on it.CFPB Withdraws 67 Guidance Documents, Many on FCRAConsumer Financial Protection BureauThe CFPB withdrew 67 interpretive rules, policy statements, advisory opinions, and circulars, including its FCRA advisory opinions on background screening, file disclosure, permissible purpose, and name-only matching. The Bureau said it would not prioritize enforcement of the withdrawn guidance while it reviews it.Roberts v. Carter-Young, Inc.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitThe Fourth Circuit held that a furnisher's duty to reasonably investigate an indirect dispute under § 1681s-2(b) is not limited to purely factual errors. Legal, factual, or mixed inaccuracies are actionable if they are objectively and readily verifiable by the furnisher.Barat v. Navy Federal Credit UnionU.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh CircuitThe Eleventh Circuit affirmed dismissal of an ECOA adverse action notice claim where a credit union denied a mortgage refinance for 'poor credit performance with Navy Federal,' language taken from Regulation B's model form. It held § 1691(d) requires specific reasons but says nothing about their accuracy.Wood v. Security Credit Services, LLCU.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh CircuitThe Seventh Circuit held that § 1692e(8)'s 'should be known' language imposes a negligence standard: a debt collector must use reasonable care not to report a disputed debt without noting the dispute. It found the consumer had standing and reversed summary judgment for the debt buyer.CFPB Orders Equifax to Pay $15M Over Dispute HandlingConsumer Financial Protection BureauThe CFPB issued a consent order against Equifax, Inc. and Equifax Information Services LLC finding FCRA violations in dispute reinvestigations, reinsertion of deleted information, identity theft blocking, and accuracy procedures, plus unfair practices. Equifax must pay a $15 million civil money penalty and come into compliance.Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc.U.S. District Court for the Central District of CaliforniaThe CFPB sued Experian Information Solutions, alleging that it failed to conduct reasonable reinvestigations of consumer disputes, deferred uncritically to furnishers, sent confusing results notices, and allowed deleted accounts to be reinserted under a new furnisher's name. Unlike many Biden-era cases, the suit was not dropped in 2025; after rounds of motions, Experian was ordered to answer and the case moved into discovery.
2024
Good v. U.S. Department of EducationU.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth CircuitThe Tenth Circuit reversed dismissal of a borrower's FCRA claims against the Department of Education, applying the Supreme Court's 2024 Kirtz decision, and against MOHELA, holding the Missouri loan authority is not an arm of the state entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity.CFPB: Worker Scores and Dossiers Can Be FCRA ReportsConsumer Financial Protection BureauThe CFPB said third-party background dossiers and algorithmic scores used to hire, promote, reassign, or retain workers are often consumer reports, so employers must get authorization and give adverse action notices, and the vendors must meet accuracy, file disclosure, and dispute duties. The CFPB withdrew the circular on May 12, 2025, as part of a mass withdrawal of guidance.Young v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third CircuitThe Third Circuit held that when a consumer does not dispute forming an arbitration agreement and the agreement delegates arbitrability to the arbitrator, a court should compel arbitration without first allowing discovery. The consumer had enrolled in Experian's affiliated CreditWorks service after Experian's alleged reporting error, and her objection to the agreement's scope was for the arbitrator to decide.Fernandez v. RentGrow, Inc.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitThe Fourth Circuit held that sending an inaccurate tenant screening report to a landlord is not enough for Article III standing in a damages case; the plaintiff must show a third party read and understood, or otherwise considered, the misleading information. Because the evidence showed the property manager never read the 'possible OFAC match' entry, the court vacated an order certifying a class.In re TD Bank, N.A.Consumer Financial Protection BureauThe CFPB found that TD Bank, as a furnisher, failed for years to correct known errors in credit card data, reported charge-off dates in place of the date of first delinquency, misreported bankruptcy status, kept furnishing derogatory data on deposit accounts it knew or suspected were fraudulent, and stopped investigating direct disputes for seven months. TD Bank must pay $7.76 million in redress and a $20 million penalty.Merck v. Walmart, Inc.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth CircuitThe Sixth Circuit held that a job applicant who received an incomplete copy of his background report before Walmart revoked his offer lacked Article III standing, because he did not show the missing information would have let him change the outcome. Under TransUnion, an informational injury requires adverse effects, and the court rejected analogies to fraud, contract, and due process.Berry v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth CircuitThe Sixth Circuit held that although § 1681s-1 requires credit bureaus to include overdue-support information from state agencies, it does not excuse them from the FCRA's accuracy and reinvestigation duties. A consumer plausibly alleged negligence where Experian kept re-verifying a support balance through automated forms after he sent court orders abating the obligation.Frazier v. Equifax Information Services, LLCU.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh CircuitOver a dissent, the Seventh Circuit affirmed summary judgment for Equifax, holding that a '90-119 Days Past Due' status and late codes on a mortgage closed by short sale were not materially misleading because the same tradeline showed the account closed, paid for less than the full balance, with a $0 balance. The court also held Equifax was not liable for a reseller's tri-merge report and that the consumer had not shown causation.Freeman v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLCU.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh CircuitThe Seventh Circuit affirmed dismissal of a homeowner's § 1681s-2(b) claim against her mortgage servicer because she alleged only that she disputed with 'one or more' credit bureaus without identifying which ones. It also held she lacked standing for her FDCPA claim on the summary judgment record.Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Townstone Financial, Inc.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh CircuitThe Seventh Circuit held that the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, read as a whole, reaches creditors who discourage prospective applicants on a prohibited basis, so Regulation B's discouragement rule is valid. It reversed the dismissal of the CFPB's case alleging a Chicago mortgage lender discouraged Black prospective applicants through statements on its radio show.Loper Bright Enterprises v. RaimondoSupreme Court of the United StatesThe Supreme Court overruled Chevron v. NRDC, holding that the Administrative Procedure Act requires courts to exercise independent judgment about what a statute means and forbids deferring to an agency's reading simply because the statute is ambiguous. Courts may still consider an agency's views for their persuasive force, and prior decisions that relied on Chevron are not automatically reopened.CFPB Proposed Removing Medical Debt From Credit ReportsConsumer Financial Protection BureauThe CFPB proposed amending Regulation V to remove a long-standing exception that let creditors obtain and use medical debt information despite the FCRA's limits on medical information, and to bar credit bureaus from furnishing medical debt information to creditors that could not use it. The rule was finalized in January 2025 but was vacated by a federal district court in July 2025 before it took effect.Minnesota Bans Medical Debt on Credit ReportsMinnesota LegislatureMinnesota enacted the Debt Fairness Act, which prohibits anyone collecting medical debt from reporting it to a consumer reporting agency and prohibits consumer reporting agencies from including information they know or should know concerns medical debt. The ban took effect October 1, 2024. Collecting parties that violate the chapter face strict liability for actual damages, up to $1,000 in additional damages per violation, and attorney fees.Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Community Financial Services Association of America, Ltd.Supreme Court of the United StatesThe Supreme Court held 7-2 that the statute funding the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau through draws on Federal Reserve earnings satisfies the Constitution's Appropriations Clause, reversing a Fifth Circuit ruling that the funding was unconstitutional. The decision removed a cloud over the CFPB's rules and enforcement actions, including its work under the FCRA.Holden v. Holiday Inn Club Vacations Inc.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh CircuitThe Eleventh Circuit declined to adopt a rule that only factual errors are actionable against furnishers under § 1681s-2(b), holding instead that the question is whether the alleged inaccuracy is objectively and readily verifiable. It still ruled for the timeshare company, because whether the consumers' contracts had been cancelled was a contested question on which Florida courts had split.Department of Agriculture Rural Development Rural Housing Service v. KirtzSupreme Court of the United StatesThe Supreme Court unanimously held that the FCRA's damages provisions, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681n and 1681o, allow consumers to sue federal agencies, because the Act defines a liable "person" to include government agencies. The decision affirmed the Third Circuit and resolved a circuit split over whether federal lenders and furnishers could hide behind sovereign immunity.CFPB 2024 FCRA Opinions on Background Checks and File CopiesConsumer Financial Protection BureauIn two advisory opinions, the CFPB said background screening companies that report public records must have procedures to exclude duplicate, expunged, and sealed records and to include dispositions, and that the seven-year clock for non-conviction records runs from the charge or arrest. A second opinion said consumers need no magic words to obtain their file and that bureaus must identify both original and intermediary sources of information.Santos v. Healthcare Revenue Recovery Group, LLCU.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh CircuitThe Eleventh Circuit held that a consumer who proves a willful FCRA violation may recover statutory damages of $100 to $1,000 under § 1681n(a)(1)(A) without proving actual damages, joining every other circuit to decide the question. It vacated the denial of class certification in a case over Experian's re-aging of collection-account status dates for more than 2.1 million consumers.
2023
Fair Medical Debt Reporting Act (S4907-A / A6275-A)New York State LegislatureEffective immediately on signing, the act bars hospitals, licensed health care professionals, and ambulance services from furnishing medical debt to consumer reporting agencies, requires their collection contracts to prohibit reporting, makes any portion of a medical debt furnished to a bureau void, and bars consumer reporting agencies from reporting or keeping medical debt information in a consumer's file.Hernandez v. MicroBilt Corp.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third CircuitThe Third Circuit affirmed denial of MicroBilt's motion to compel arbitration of an FCRA claim after the American Arbitration Association declined to administer the case because MicroBilt refused to waive a clause barring punitive damages and fee recovery. Because the AAA's own rules, incorporated in the agreement, allowed either party to go to court when the AAA declines a case, the consumer had complied with the arbitration agreement and could not be sent back.In the Matter of Toyota Motor Credit Corporation, d/b/a Toyota Financial ServicesConsumer Financial Protection BureauThe CFPB found Toyota Motor Credit made it hard to cancel add-on products, failed to refund unearned premiums, and, in violation of the FCRA and Regulation V, kept reporting lease customers as delinquent after they had returned their vehicles. The order required $48 million in redress and a $12 million penalty; the CFPB terminated it on May 12, 2025.In the Matter of TransUnion; Trans Union LLC; and TransUnion Interactive, Inc.Consumer Financial Protection BureauThe CFPB found TransUnion and two subsidiaries failed to timely place or remove security freezes and locks for tens of thousands of consumers, told some consumers requests had been honored when they had not, and failed to keep consumers with active-duty or extended fraud alerts off prescreened marketing lists. The order required $3 million in redress and a $5 million penalty; the CFPB terminated it on November 3, 2025.Federal Trade Commission and Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. TransUnion Rental Screening Solutions, Inc. and Trans Union LLCU.S. District Court for the District of ColoradoThe FTC and CFPB sued TransUnion Rental Screening Solutions and Trans Union LLC, alleging tenant screening reports included duplicate eviction entries, wrong or missing case outcomes, misleading labels, and sealed records, and that file disclosures failed to name third-party data vendors. The stipulated order required $11 million in consumer redress, a $4 million civil penalty, and new accuracy procedures.Ingram v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third CircuitA collector refused to look into an identity-theft dispute that Experian forwarded to it, reasoning the consumer had not sent documents the original creditor requested. The Third Circuit reversed summary judgment for the collector, holding that § 1681s-2(b) contains no frivolous-or-irrelevant exception for indirect disputes received from a credit bureau.CFPB Circular 2023-03: Denial Reasons Must Be RealConsumer Financial Protection BureauCircular 2023-03 said creditors may not rely on the checklist of reasons in Regulation B's sample adverse action forms if those reasons do not specifically and accurately state the principal reasons for a denial, including when decisions come from AI or complex credit models. The CFPB withdrew the circular on May 12, 2025, though the underlying ECOA and Regulation B requirements remain.Sessa v. Trans Union, LLCU.S. Court of Appeals for the Second CircuitTransUnion reported that a consumer owed a balloon payment at the end of her car lease, though the lease only gave her an option to buy. The Second Circuit vacated summary judgment for TransUnion, holding that § 1681e(b) has no threshold inquiry into whether an error is legal or factual; the question is whether the information is objectively and readily verifiable.In the Matter of Phoenix Financial Services, LLCConsumer Financial Protection BureauThe CFPB found that Phoenix Financial Services, which collects mostly medical debts, investigated credit report disputes by matching the disputer's name, Social Security number, and birth date to its own records, routed about 30% of bureau disputes to an automated program, and kept sending collection letters on disputed debts it had not verified. It imposed a $1.675 million penalty and required refunds.House Bill 23-1126Colorado General AssemblySigned June 5, 2023 and effective August 7, 2023, the law prohibits consumer reporting agencies from making a consumer report containing adverse information they know or should know concerns medical debt, except for credit transactions above the federal conforming loan limit. It bars collectors from falsely saying medical debt will be reported and requires a disclosure in their first letter. The provisions are set to expire July 1, 2028.Mader v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second CircuitThe Second Circuit affirmed summary judgment for Experian on a § 1681e(b) claim over a private student loan the consumer said was discharged in his Chapter 7 bankruptcy. It held that FCRA accuracy focuses on objectively and readily verifiable information, and that an alleged error turning on an unsettled bankruptcy-law question is not cognizable against a credit bureau.
2022
CFPB Reports Find Errors Common in Tenant ScreeningConsumer Financial Protection BureauThe CFPB released a Tenant Background Checks Market Report and a Consumer Snapshot based on complaints and interviews. They found that tenant screening reports often include records belonging to other people, outdated information, and misleading eviction and criminal entries; that rental payment history is rarely included; and that landlords often fail to send required adverse action notices. The CFPB said the findings suggest some screening companies are not meeting the FCRA's accuracy requirement.CFPB Circular: No Roadblocks to Credit Report DisputesConsumer Financial Protection BureauIn Circular 2022-07, the CFPB told enforcers that credit bureaus and furnishers may not avoid their FCRA duty to reasonably investigate disputes by requiring a particular format, a proprietary form, a copy of the credit report, or other documents beyond what the law requires. It also said a bureau that fails to forward images of a consumer's key documents to the furnisher will have difficulty showing it sent "all relevant information." The circular was withdrawn on May 12, 2025.Henderson v. Source for Public Data, L.P.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitThe Fourth Circuit reversed a ruling that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act barred four FCRA claims against PublicData.com. It held the disclosure and certification claims did not treat the company as a publisher, and that the accuracy claims survived because, as alleged, the company materially contributed to the inaccuracies by summarizing and stripping details from criminal records.Bibbs v. Trans Union LLCU.S. Court of Appeals for the Third CircuitThe Third Circuit adopted a "reasonable reader" standard for deciding whether a credit report is inaccurate or misleading, requiring courts to read an entry in the context of the whole report. Applying it, the court held that a "120 Days Past Due" pay status on transferred student loans was not misleading where the reports showed the accounts closed with $0 balances, and affirmed judgment for Trans Union.CFPB 2022 Opinion: Permissible Purpose Is Person-SpecificConsumer Financial Protection BureauThe CFPB issued an advisory opinion interpreting FCRA § 604 (15 U.S.C. § 1681b). It said the permissible purposes in § 604(a)(3) apply only to the consumer who is the subject of the request, so a consumer reporting agency may not include information unless it has reason to believe the information pertains to that consumer. It added that disclaimers do not cure the problem and that § 604(f) strictly prohibits users from obtaining reports without a permissible purpose. The CFPB withdrew the opinion on May 12, 2025.CFPB's 2022 Rule: FCRA Leaves Room for State LawsConsumer Financial Protection BureauThe CFPB issued an interpretive rule reading the FCRA's preemption clauses, 15 U.S.C. § 1681t(b)(1) and (b)(5), narrowly. It said states could generally bar credit bureaus from reporting medical debt, evictions, arrest records, or rental arrears, and could bar furnishers from reporting such information. The rule was withdrawn on May 12, 2025, and replaced in October 2025 by a rule taking the opposite view.Gross v. CitiMortgage, Inc.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitThe Ninth Circuit reversed summary judgment for CitiMortgage, holding that reporting a past-due balance, late payments, and accruing interest on a junior mortgage was "patently incorrect" because Arizona's anti-deficiency statute abolished the borrower's personal liability. It held the FCRA does not categorically exempt legal issues from a furnisher's investigation and sent the reasonableness question to a jury.Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. TransUnionConsumer Financial Protection BureauThe CFPB sued TransUnion, Trans Union LLC, TransUnion Interactive, and former executive John Danaher in federal court in Chicago, alleging they violated a 2017 consent order by continuing deceptive enrollment in paid credit monitoring, making cancellation difficult, and placing ads on annualcreditreport.com that steered people seeking free reports into paid subscriptions. The parties stipulated to dismissal with prejudice in February 2025.CFPB Report Finds $88 Billion in Medical Debt on ReportsConsumer Financial Protection BureauThe CFPB released "Medical Debt Burden in the United States," estimating $88 billion in medical debt on consumer credit records as of June 2021 and finding that medical collections made up 58 percent of collection tradelines. The Bureau said it would hold credit bureaus accountable for medical debt accuracy and study whether unpaid medical bills belong on credit reports at all.
2021
CFPB Debt Collection Rule (Regulation F) Takes EffectConsumer Financial Protection BureauTwo CFPB final rules amending Regulation F took effect on November 30, 2021. They set a presumptive limit of seven call attempts in seven days, govern emails and texts, require a model-style validation notice, ban suits on time-barred debt, and bar collectors from furnishing a debt to a credit bureau before communicating with the consumer.Maddox v. Bank of New York Mellon Trust Co., N.A.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second CircuitOn rehearing in light of TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, the Second Circuit held that borrowers whose mortgage satisfaction was recorded nearly a year late lacked Article III standing to seek New York statutory penalties. No one was alleged to have seen the false record, the claimed credit risks never materialized, and the emotional distress allegations were implausible.CFPB: Name-Only Matching Violates the FCRA (Withdrawn)Consumer Financial Protection BureauThe CFPB issued an advisory opinion concluding that a consumer reporting agency that matches records to consumers by first and last name alone is not using reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy under 15 U.S.C. § 1681e(b), and that adding a few identifiers creates no safe harbor. The CFPB withdrew it on May 12, 2025.Chuluunbat v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh CircuitIn seven consolidated appeals, the Seventh Circuit held that consumers' claims that debt buyers did not own their credit card debts raised legal questions outside a credit bureau's competency, not factual inaccuracies the bureau had to reinvestigate under 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681e(b) and 1681i. It affirmed dismissal of every case.TransUnion LLC v. RamirezSupreme Court of the United StatesIn a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court held that every class member seeking damages must show a concrete harm. The 1,853 consumers whose reports with false OFAC "terrorist" alerts were sent to businesses had standing; the 6,332 whose files were never disseminated did not, and only the named plaintiff had standing on the mailing-format claims.Losch v. Nationstar Mortgage LLCU.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh CircuitThe Eleventh Circuit held that reporting a balance and past-due status on a mortgage discharged in Chapter 7 was factually inaccurate, and that a jury could find Experian negligent where it did nothing but send an automated dispute form to the servicer. It affirmed summary judgment for Experian on willfulness.
2020
United States v. AppFolio, Inc.U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (FTC action filed by the Department of Justice)Acting for the FTC, the Justice Department alleged that tenant screening company AppFolio violated FCRA §§ 1681c(a) and 1681e(b) by reporting outdated eviction and non-conviction criminal records and by relying on a vendor's records without reasonable accuracy procedures. AppFolio agreed to a $4.25 million civil penalty and an injunction to settle the case.Muransky v. Godiva Chocolatier, Inc.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit (en banc)The en banc Eleventh Circuit held that a consumer who received a receipt showing the first six and last four digits of his card, in violation of FACTA's truncation rule, lacked Article III standing because he alleged only a statutory violation and no concrete harm or material risk of harm. It vacated approval of a $6.3 million class settlement.Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection BureauSupreme Court of the United StatesThe Supreme Court held 5-4 that the CFPB's leadership by a single director removable only for cause violated the separation of powers. A plurality held the removal protection severable, so the CFPB continues to operate with a director the President can remove at will. The Court vacated and remanded on whether a civil investigative demand had been validly ratified.Denan v. Trans Union LLCU.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh CircuitThe Seventh Circuit affirmed judgment for Trans Union on claims under §§ 1681e(b) and 1681i(a) brought by consumers who said their high-interest tribal payday loans were void under state law. It held that inaccuracy under both sections means factual inaccuracy and that a credit bureau need not resolve legal defenses to a debt absent a court ruling.Statement on Supervisory and Enforcement Practices Regarding the Fair Credit Reporting Act and Regulation V in Light of the CARES ActConsumer Financial Protection BureauThe CFPB issued a non-binding policy statement saying it did not intend to cite or bring enforcement actions against credit bureaus or furnishers making good-faith efforts to investigate disputes, even if investigations ran past the FCRA's 30-day deadline. The CFPB rescinded the dispute portion of the statement effective April 1, 2021.Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act), § 4021U.S. CongressSection 4021 of the CARES Act added a new subparagraph to the FCRA's furnisher accuracy provision. If a creditor granted a COVID-19 accommodation and the consumer met its terms, the creditor had to report the account as current, or keep a prior delinquency frozen until the consumer brought the account current. Charged-off accounts were excluded.Ramirez v. TransUnion LLCU.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitThe Ninth Circuit held that every member of a damages class must have Article III standing at the final stage, then found all 8,185 class members had standing because TransUnion's name-only OFAC matching exposed them to a real risk of harm. It affirmed willfulness and statutory damages but cut punitive damages. The Supreme Court reversed in TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez (2021).
These summaries and opinions are general information, not legal advice, and may not reflect later decisions.