Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
Christian Rojas sued consumer reporting agencies Experian Information Solutions, Inc. and Trans Union LLC under the Fair Credit Reporting Act. He alleged that they negligently or willfully violated 15 U.S.C. § 1681e(b) by failing to use reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy when reporting four collection accounts associated with Credence Resource Management, Enhanced Recovery Company, CBE Group, and Credit Collection Services.
Rojas asserted that the Credence and CBE accounts belonged to his twin brother, although furnishers reported the accounts using Rojas’s full name and Social Security number. He admitted co-signing the AT&T account that later went into collections with Enhanced, and he conceded opening the CCS account but supplied no competent evidence that he had paid it in full. Before suit, Experian and Trans Union had deleted the disputed Credence and Enhanced accounts from their respective files. Both defendants moved for summary judgment.
The Court’s Holding
The court granted both motions for summary judgment. It held that Rojas failed to produce competent evidence showing that any of the four reported accounts was factually inaccurate or materially misleading. His assertions concerning his twin brother, his father’s later control of the AT&T account, and his uncertain recollection of paying the CCS account did not create a genuine dispute of material fact.
The court further held that, even assuming an inaccuracy, Rojas did not show that it resulted from a negligent or willful failure to follow reasonable procedures, and he did not rebut the defendants’ evidence that their procedures were reasonable. He also failed to establish a legally cognizable injury caused by the reporting: the identified credit-card denials occurred after the accounts had been removed, the alleged higher mortgage rate was not tied to the defendants, and the record did not sufficiently support emotional-distress damages. The court ordered that Rojas take nothing against Experian and Trans Union.
Key Takeaways
- A Section 1681e(b) plaintiff must first present competent evidence that the credit report contained information that was factually inaccurate or materially misleading.
- An alleged inaccuracy alone does not establish FCRA liability; the plaintiff must connect it to the consumer reporting agency’s negligent or willful failure to use reasonable procedures.
- Claims for actual damages require evidence that the challenged reporting caused a legally cognizable injury, and unsupported assertions cannot defeat summary judgment.
Why It Matters
The decision illustrates the evidentiary burden FCRA plaintiffs face at summary judgment. A consumer cannot proceed merely by disputing ownership or payment of an account; the record must support the claimed inaccuracy, a deficiency in the reporting agency’s procedures, and causally related harm.
The opinion also underscores that the FCRA does not impose strict liability on consumer reporting agencies for every inaccurate entry. Plaintiffs alleging negligent or willful noncompliance must prove each statutory element with admissible evidence.