- Ninth Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Consumer's FDCPA and FCRA Claims against Furnisher
- September 30, 2009
- Law Firm: Strasburger & Price, LLP - Frisco Office
Brooks v. Citibank (South Dakota), N.A., 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 20119 (9th Cir. Or. Sept. 8, 2009)
Facts: The trial court granted Defendant Citibank’s Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s claims under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) and the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”), which the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed.
- FDCPA. Section 1692e prohibits debt collectors from using any false, deceptive, or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt. A “debt collector” is defined in § 1692a(6) as any person who regularly collects or attempts to collect, directly or indirectly, debts owed or due or asserted to be owed or due another.
- FDCPA. The FDCPA does not apply to creditors attempting to collect their own debt.
- FCRA. Under § 1681s-2(b)(1)(A)-(C), when a furnisher is notified of a dispute with regard to the completeness of the information it provides, the furnisher must: (1) conduct an investigation with respect to the disputed information; (2) review all relevant information provided by the consumer reporting agency; and (3) report the results of the investigation to the consumer reporting agency.
- FCRA. When Plaintiff generally disputed the accuracy of an account, Defendant’s investigation of comparing the personal information provided by Plaintiff to the information in Defendant’s records, checking the account information, and confirming the accuracy of the debt was reasonable as a matter of law.