- Case
- Federal Trade Commission and Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. TransUnion Rental Screening Solutions, Inc. and Trans Union LLC
- Source
- U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado
- Citation
- No. 1:23-cv-2659 (D. Colo.)
- Decided
- October 12, 2023
- Bottom line
- Tenant screening companies must report eviction records accurately and completely, including dismissals, and must tell you where their information came from.
Background
Landlords rely heavily on tenant screening reports, and eviction records can decide whether an applicant gets an apartment. Tenant screening companies are consumer reporting agencies under the FCRA. They must “follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy” under 15 U.S.C. § 1681e(b), and on request must disclose to a consumer all information in the file and “the sources of the information” under § 1681g(a).
TransUnion Rental Screening Solutions (TURSS), a Colorado-based subsidiary, sold tenant and employment screening reports. According to the complaint, it bought its eviction records from a vendor, LexisNexis Risk and Information Analytics Group, without imposing specific accuracy and completeness requirements on that vendor. Its parent, Trans Union LLC, was named as well. The complaint alleged that TURSS received “tens of thousands” of consumer disputes about eviction records.
What the order requires
On October 12, 2023, the FTC and CFPB filed a joint complaint and proposed stipulated order in federal court in Colorado. The complaint alleged two FCRA violations.
Inaccurate eviction records (§ 1681e(b)). The agencies alleged TURSS failed to follow reasonable procedures to prevent:
- multiple entries for the same eviction case, so one case could look like several evictions;
- records showing only that a case was filed, or showing the wrong outcome, such as a judgment when the case was actually dismissed, sometimes months or years after the real outcome;
- labels such as “Judgment Amount” for money a landlord merely claimed, implying a court award; and
- sealed eviction records, which before November 2021 could remain in TURSS’s database.
Hidden sources (§ 1681g(a)). Before June 2021, TURSS’s file disclosures named the court as the only source of eviction and criminal records even when it bought them from vendors. The complaint alleged TURSS began naming LexisNexis only after receiving an FTC civil investigative demand.
The stipulated order, entered by the court on October 20, 2023, required TransUnion to pay $15 million: $11 million to compensate consumers and a $4 million civil penalty. It required procedures to keep out sealed records, cases without a final disposition, duplicate filings, and money amounts other than final judgments; disclosure of all sources, including vendors; free disclosure on request of everything in the consumer’s file, including what landlords receive; and posting of a sample adverse action notice for landlords. The FTC described the payment as the largest amount it had recovered in a tenant screening matter.
In the FTC’s announcement, CFPB Director Rohit Chopra said “Americans across the country were put at risk of wrongful housing denials because TransUnion failed to follow the law.” The same day, the CFPB issued a separate order against TransUnion over credit freezes and locks.
Our take
The problems described here are not technical quibbles. A dismissed eviction reported as a judgment, or one case reported three times, can cost someone a home. The settlement’s requirement to exclude cases without a final disposition addresses a recurring problem with eviction reporting: a filing is not an eviction, and many cases end in dismissal or settlement.
These were allegations resolved by settlement, not findings after a trial, and screening companies do face real challenges in collecting court data from thousands of jurisdictions. But the FCRA places the accuracy duty on the company that sells the report, and buying data from a vendor does not shift that duty. The source-disclosure claim matters too: a consumer cannot correct an error at its origin without knowing where it came from. The 2025 withdrawal of CFPB guidance and the agency’s reduced enforcement do not affect this court order or the statute it enforces.
What it means if your report is wrong
If a landlord turns you down because of a screening report, the landlord must tell you which company supplied it. Request your free file from that company, and ask it to identify its sources. Check every eviction entry: Was the case dismissed? Is it listed more than once? Was it sealed? Does it show a “judgment” that was never entered? Dispute errors in writing with court records attached, and keep copies of the denial.
A free case review can assess how this order affects a claim, and there is no fee unless we win.
Sources
Primary
- FTC press release: FTC and CFPB settlement to require Trans Union to pay $15 million (Oct. 12, 2023)
- Case page and filings, including complaint and stipulated order (FTC)
- Complaint (D. Colo., filed Oct. 12, 2023)
- Prepared remarks of CFPB Enforcement Director Eric Halperin on the TransUnion actions (Oct. 12, 2023)
Commentary we reviewed
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.