On May 1, the District Court for the Middle District of Alabama issued an order requesting that the parties provide supplemental briefing on the issue of standing in a lawsuit alleging Fair Credit Reporting Act violations.
Recent multi-million dollar settlements highlight the importance for employers of complying with the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA).
With increasing regularity, states and localities have passed laws that limit the ability of private employers to inquire into or otherwise consider the criminal or credit histories of their prospective and current employees.
Retailers, restaurants, and other employers received a $4 million reminder last week of the need to ensure compliance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act’s disclosure requirements in connection with employee background checks.
On September 10, Congresswoman Maxine Waters released a draft proposal entitled “Fair Credit Reporting Improvement Act of 2014” that, if passed, could lead to fundamental changes in the credit reporting industry.
In Mack v. Equable Ascent Financial, L.L.C., the Fifth Circuit ruled the consumer’s suit was barred under the Fair Credit Reporting Act’s two-year statute of limitations. Rejecting the plaintiff’s claim that the statute does not begin to run when the consumer discovers the facts that constitute the legal violation, the Court of Appeals held that the limitations period begins to run when a claimant discovers facts that give rise to the claim.
Sixth Circuit Affirms Dismissal of FCRA Permissible Purpose Claim Even Though Plaintiff Did Not Initiate Transaction
In Bickley v. Dish Network, the Sixth Circuit on May 13, 2014 affirmed the dismissal of a claim for violating the Fair Credit Reporting Act for accessing a credit report without a permissible purpose.
Since 60 Minutes aired, 40 Million Mistakes: Is Your Credit Report Accurate?, their has been an increase in the filing of federal lawsuits under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”) and Fair Debt Collections Practices Act (“FDCPA”) by consumers throughout the U.S.
There’s already been quite a bit of media attention around the fact that Swift Transportation Company (Swift) agreed to a $4.4 million settlement to settle a class action lawsuit which alleged that the company failed to inform job applicants about their rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) as well as their alleged failure to follow the FCRA in other respects.
On April 21, 2014, Swift Transportation Co. of Arizona and a class of plaintiffs jointly moved for preliminary settlement approval to end litigation for alleged violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”) in Ellis, et al. v. Swift Transportation Co. of Arizona, LLC, Case No. 13-CV473 (E.D. Va. April 21, 2014).