- Source
- Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
- Decided
- January 23, 2024
- Bottom line
- The opinions were withdrawn in 2025, but the FCRA duties they described come from the statute, and courts can still find their reasoning persuasive.
Background
Background screening companies sell reports to landlords and employers that compile criminal records, eviction filings, and other public records. Those reports are “consumer reports” under the FCRA, so the companies must follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy under § 1681e(b) (section 607(b) of the Act) and must observe the time limits in § 1681c, which generally bar reporting adverse items more than seven years old other than criminal convictions.
The CFPB had repeatedly found screening reports that matched records to the wrong person, listed the same case multiple times, reported charges without noting they were dismissed, and included sealed or expunged records. Separately, consumers trying to see what was in their files were sometimes given partial disclosures or were told they had to request their “complete file” in specific words.
In January 2024 the CFPB announced two advisory opinions, published in the Federal Register on January 23, 2024, and effective that day.
What changed
Background screening (89 Fed. Reg. 4171). The CFPB said that a consumer reporting agency that reports public record information is not using reasonable procedures under § 1681e(b) unless it has procedures to ensure that it (1) does not report information that is duplicative, or that has been expunged, sealed, or otherwise legally restricted from public access, and (2) includes any existing disposition if it reports an arrest, criminal charge, eviction proceeding, or other court filing. It also said that the seven-year reporting period for adverse items starts when the adverse event occurs and is not restarted by later events, so a dismissed or otherwise non-conviction criminal charge cannot be reported more than seven years after the charge. The opinion noted that some screeners had been starting the clock at the disposition date.
File disclosure (89 Fed. Reg. 4167). The CFPB said that to trigger a consumer reporting agency’s duty to disclose the consumer’s file under § 1681g(a), a consumer does not need to use specific language such as “complete file.” It described the information that must be disclosed and said that agencies must identify both the original source of each item and any intermediary or vendor that supplied it.
Our take
We think both opinions accurately described what the statute already required, and that is why their withdrawal matters less than it might seem. Reporting a sealed record, a charge without its dismissal, or the same case three times is inaccurate or misleading under any sensible reading of § 1681e(b), and several courts had said so before 2024. The point about the seven-year clock tracks the text of § 1681c(a)(5) and the Ninth Circuit’s Moran v. Screening Pros decisions, which the CFPB cited.
The source-disclosure point is especially useful in practice. Many screening companies buy records from vendors that scrape court data. A consumer who cannot see which vendor supplied a wrong record cannot easily fix it at its origin, and the error keeps coming back.
Defendants argued from the start that advisory opinions are not binding, and after Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (June 2024) courts give agency interpretations weight only to the extent they persuade.
Later developments: on May 12, 2025, the CFPB withdrew both opinions, along with dozens of other guidance documents, stating that it is now Bureau policy to avoid issuing guidance except where necessary and where it would reduce compliance burdens (90 Fed. Reg. 20084). The withdrawal did not change § 1681e(b), § 1681c, or § 1681g, and courts remain free to adopt the opinions’ reasoning.
What it means if your report is wrong
If a tenant or employment screening report shows a sealed or expunged record, a case listed more than once, a charge without its dismissal, or an arrest more than seven years old, dispute it in writing with the screening company and ask for your complete file, including the source of each record. Request the report the landlord or employer received. Those errors can support FCRA claims based on the statute itself. A free case review can assess your situation, with no fee unless we win.
Sources
Primary
- Federal Register — Fair Credit Reporting; Background Screening, 89 Fed. Reg. 4171 (Jan. 23, 2024)
- Federal Register — Fair Credit Reporting; File Disclosure, 89 Fed. Reg. 4167 (Jan. 23, 2024)
- Federal Register — Interpretive Rules, Policy Statements, and Advisory Opinions; Withdrawal, 90 Fed. Reg. 20084 (May 12, 2025)
Commentary we reviewed
- Ballard Spahr, Consumer Finance Monitor — CFPB issues two new FCRA advisory opinions on background screening reports and disclosure of credit files
- National Consumer Law Center — Two new CFPB advisory opinions facilitate private FCRA litigation
- Cooley — CFPB issues background screening, file disclosure advisory opinions
Updated November 1, 2026. "Our take" is the firm's opinion. This page is general information, not legal advice, and later decisions may change the law.