Does anyone know the basis for ACTUAL DAMAGES in Johnson v MBNA or other noteworthy cases? Johnson was awarded actual damages were in excess of $80,000, which is pretty significant. I assume that this might be based upon the calculation of the lifetime difference in interest between a mortgage she obtained at an unfavorable rate and what the interest rate would have been had her credit been accurately reported. Just a guess. If such is this case, does one actually have to obtain the mortgage to suffer actual damages? Can you just be denied the favorable rate and use that as a basis for determining actual damages? What if there are several offending creditors that have innacurately reported your credit at the same time? Hwo do you bring action? Against them as a group or individually? If so, how is the responsibility for damages allocated? The court is not going to award you 100% of your damages each time you win a suit against a creditor for FCRA violations because, at least after the first time, the court will have already determined the first party's responsibility for your damages. Jeff
$90,300 was Johnson's damages. Basically there are a lot of ways which damages can be considered actual. If you were denied credit, the value of the credit which you were denied, may be able to be considered actual damages. If you were jacked to a higher percentage, the difference between the two rates over the life of the account may be able to be considered actual damages. The same as for being denied for the best rate of a mortgage (From the judgement, this seems to be how the jury in Johnson determined the actual damages. Since that was how she found out about the trade line appearing on her account. And also one of MBNA's chief appeal issues, "she wasn't harmed, now that its deleted she could just re-finance." DUH! How many banks will allow you to re-finance on an account which you just opened? Plus, she was already damaged by having the higher rate for the period thus far...)
Originally posted by jefftsnsco [/i] Johnson was awarded actual damages were in excess of $80,000, which is pretty significant. I assume that this might be based upon the calculation of the lifetime difference in interest between a mortgage she obtained at an unfavorable rate and what the interest rate would have been had her credit been accurately reported. Just a guess. __________________________________________________ If such is this case, does one actually have to obtain the mortgage to suffer actual damages? Can you just be denied the favorable rate and use that as a basis for determining actual damages? What if there are several offending creditors that have innacurately reported your credit at the same time? Hwo do you bring action? Against them as a group or individually? If so, how is the responsibility for damages allocated? __________________________________________________ good question does anybody know?? do you sue individulaly or do you include all the defendants together? does the mortgage actually have to take place or can you claim irrepairable damage as a result of being denied or being offered a higher rate ?
Although difficult to quantify, intentional infliction of emotioal distress, pain & suffering, etc. are "ACTUAL" damages.
