Results 1 to 4 of 4
  1. #1
    keepmine is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    1,487

    Big win for consumers

    I don't know ifthis has been posted here or not but, though I'd put up just incase. You may now sue a creditor for failing to maintain reasonable standards.
    http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/...th/031235p.pdf


    Johnson v. MBNA America Bank, NA
    On 2/11/04, the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals handed down its decision in this appeal, affirming a judgment entered against MBNA following a jury verdict in favor of plaintiff Johnson on a claim that MBNA violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act by failing to conduct a reasonable investigation of plaintiff's dispute concerning an MBNA account appearing on her credit report. MBNA's first contention was that the district court made an error when it ruled furnishers of credit information must perform a "reasonable" investigation of consumer disputes. MBNA, in essence, says there isn't a qualitiative component to the investigation provision that would allow a court or jury to assess whether the creditor's investigation was reasonable. The Court went back to the plain meaning of the term "investigation" and concluded it would make little sense to believe that Congress would use the term "investigation" to include superficial, unreasonable inquiries. The court therefore held that creditors must indeed conduct a "reasonable" investigation of their records after receiving notice of a consumer dispute from a credit reporting agency. The next issue, then, was whether the jury's determination that MBNA did not conduct a reasonable investigation was supported by the evidence. The Court looks at the steps MBNA took and finds that a jury could reasonably conclude that MBNA acted unreasonably. Although the disputed credit account was for $17,000, the jury found that Johnson's actual damages stemming from the incorrect information furnished by MBNA totaled $90,300. After finding that MBNA had negligently failed to comply with the FCRA, the jury awarded Johnson $90,300 and that verdict was upheld on appeal. There are many other issues discussed. Read the Court's opinion for complete details.

  2. #2
    lbrown59 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    17,876

    Re: Big win for consumers

    Originally posted by keepmine
    I don't know ifthis has been posted here or not but, though I'd put up just incase. You may now sue a creditor for failing to maintain reasonable standards.
    http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/...th/031235p.pdf


    Johnson v. MBNA America Bank, NA
    On 2/11/04, the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals handed down its decision in this appeal, affirming a judgment entered against MBNA following a jury verdict in favor of plaintiff Johnson on a claim that MBNA violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act by failing to conduct a reasonable investigation of plaintiff's dispute concerning an MBNA account appearing on her credit report. MBNA's first contention was that the district court made an error when it ruled furnishers of credit information must perform a "reasonable" investigation of consumer disputes. MBNA, in essence, says there isn't a qualitiative component to the investigation provision that would allow a court or jury to assess whether the creditor's investigation was reasonable. The Court went back to the plain meaning of the term "investigation" and concluded it would make little sense to believe that Congress would use the term "investigation" to include superficial, unreasonable inquiries. The court therefore held that creditors must indeed conduct a "reasonable" investigation of their records after receiving notice of a consumer dispute from a credit reporting agency. The next issue, then, was whether the jury's determination that MBNA did not conduct a reasonable investigation was supported by the evidence. The Court looks at the steps MBNA took and finds that a jury could reasonably conclude that MBNA acted unreasonably. Although the disputed credit account was for $17,000, the jury found that Johnson's actual damages stemming from the incorrect information furnished by MBNA totaled $90,300. After finding that MBNA had negligently failed to comply with the FCRA, the jury awarded Johnson $90,300 and that verdict was upheld on appeal. There are many other issues discussed. Read the Court's opinion for complete details.
    Great and as it should be.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Special for newbies ------ Read these links
    http://consumers.creditnet.com/strai...243#post410243
    *** Victims of Credit Reporting ***
    http://members.aol.com/victcrdrpt/Score.html

    They never take it off the report when we make it right so why should we take it off the docket when they do?

  3. #3
    NextLevel is offline Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    84

    Re: Big win for consumers

    Sweet Lord Almighty!

    I really think I'm going to go this route when and if I can.

    Is there an approach to determining loss from credit misinformation?

    I was not qualified to refinance at an excellent rate, and was forced to take a sub-par rate. What is the impact then on everything surrounding that?

  4. #4
    GEORGE is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Posts
    20,468

    Re: Big win for consumers

    ...AND I CAN'T EVEN GET A $3,400 CLI or even $400 AFTER 8+ YEARS!!!
    GEORGE~~A.K.A. RODNEY DANGERFIELD
    700 CLUB MEMBER
    86 POINTS TILL THE 800 CLUB
    Copyright © "RANDOM NUMBER GENERATOR"
    Copyright © BUMPAGE (STOLEN FROM LKH~~I WILL SHARE MY PROFITS)
    UYGF~Copyright © MarkLA/Quixote
    I'm not SHOUTING!!! You have CAPSLOCKAPHOBIA

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Find a
Credit Card

Research, compare, & apply

Bad Credit

0% Interest

Cash Back

No Annual Fee

search