California Credit Reporting Abuse Law Firm: Federal Court Announces Pro-Consumer Standard

California Credit Reporting Abuse Law Firm: Federal Court Announces Pro-Consumer Standard

If you have ever tried to read your credit report issued by one of the three national credit reporting bureaus, no doubt, you found it confusing and bewildering. Most of the information is coded and ranked and not particularly easy to understand. As such, it may be difficult for you to know if what is being reported on your credit report is accurate. This is one reason to contact Credit Reporting Abuse attorneys like the ones here, Guardian Litigation Group. If you have been searching for a “credit report accuracy Law Firm near me,” we are the ones to call. Our number is (949) 444-5474. We can help you understand your credit report and offer advice and counsel on its accuracy. We are California Credit Abuse Report lawyers. You can recover money damages if your credit has been reported inaccurately. Your rights can be violated.

Because credit reports are so confusing, a federal court recently changed the legal standard by which credit reports are to be evaluated with regard to whether the credit report is false, misleading, and/or inaccurate. The federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) — enacted more than 50 years ago — MANDATES that credit reporting bureaus report only accurate information. Further, credit reporting bureaus legally are required to have “reasonable procedures” that ensure the “maximum possible accuracy” of issued credit reports. The federal court in question, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, has held that for purposes of the FCRA, the analysis of accuracy and “reasonable procedures” must be based on a “reasonable reader” legal standard, rather than a “reasonable creditor” legal standard. This is important and “good news” for debtors and consumers since it will make it easier for consumers/debtors to prove violations of the FCRA.

The case under discussion is Bibbs v. TransUnion LLC, Case Nos. 21-1350, 21-1527, 21-1530 (US Federal 3rd. Cir. August 8, 2022). The case involved student loan debt that was unpaid. After several months, for each borrower, the original student loan debt accounts were transferred to new collection companies. But, the credit reports still listed the original debt accounts/companies as unpaid and with pay statuses of “120 days overdue.” The new collection accounts were also listed and also indicated “overdue” statuses.

The borrowers argued that having both the old and new collection accounts listed for the same debt was unfair and misleading under the FCRA. Essentially, the double reporting made it seem as though there was more unpaid debt than there was in reality. From a “reasonable creditor” vantage, this was not unfair, confusing, or misleading since creditors, landlords, employers and other routine users of credit reports would understand the coding. Using a “reasonable creditor” legal standard allowed TransUnion to “win” at the lower level. But, on appeal before the Circuit Court of Appeals, the “win” was reversed. The court held that the proper legal standard was a “reasonable reader” standard. From that vantage, the double reporting of the student loan debt WAS confusing and misleading.

Contact Our Experienced California FCRA Attorneys

For more information, contact the FCRA lawyers at Guardian Litigation Group. We have the tools and legal experience necessary to protect you, vindicate your rights, and potentially, recover money damages on your behalf. We are your California Fair Credit Reporting Law Firm. Our Mission is to provide unparalleled legal services and support to consumers and financially distressed individuals. We can be reached via our contact page or by phone at (949) 444-5474. We are located in Irvine, California.