How can one prove damages for a CRA violating California's Consumer Credit Reporting Agencies Act? I am afraid that if I argue any damages that are covered under FERCA that the case has a possibility of being moved to federal court. Thoughts?
The California's Consumer Credit Reporting Agencies Act was created to regulate consumer credit reporting agencies to protect the interests of the people. It's outlined in civil Code 1785. While it is similar to FCRA, I am unable to find that the California Civil Code covers statutory damages. In court I'd rather not have to prove up actual damages since I have none (yet). In my case the CRAs violated the law by reporting information about me that can not be validated. I am trying to take the cheap and easy way to a judgement in hopes to correct the incorrect reporting that the CRAs are doing. Multiple disputes with the CRAs and creditor hasn't gotten much corrected. Any ideas anyone might have on statutory damages would be awesome
Well, you can file FCRA processes at lower courts than Federal, and if you can not afford the costs of filing in Federal Court, you can file for "in forma loca pauperis" status, which asks the court to waive the fees for filing the case.
In my case I am more concerned about time and my unfamiliarity with federal courts. With small claims it might take less than 2 months without any more paperwork or discovery. So I am planning not to mention any FCRA remedies or compensatory damages and hope I can find statutory damages in the civil code. Any experience or help with statutory damages found within the civil code from anyone with a similar issue would be awesome.
Only speaking from my own personal experience... Ooooops, I'm not allowed to speak from my own personal experience... Need I say (or not say) any more?
Has anyone had experience using this code section below? Because I have no actual damages I suspect I can argue item 1785.31 (a)(2)(c) as request 'other' monetary relief based on 'foreseeable' damages. Any thoughts or experience with this? California Civil Code Section 1785.31 (a) Any consumer who suffers damages as a result of a violation of this title by any person may bring an action in a court of appropriate jurisdiction against that person to recover the following: (1) In the case of a negligent violation, actual damages, including court costs, loss of wages, attorney's fees and, when applicable, pain and suffering. (2) In the case of a willful violation: (A) Actual damages as set forth in paragraph (1) above: (B) Punitive damages of not less than one hundred dollars ($100) nor more than five thousand dollars ($5,000) for each violation as the court deems proper; (C) Any other relief that the court deems proper.
The negligent standard under (a)(1), may be the best approach. Damages... Is there something on the trade line that is resulting in a significant decrease to your score that is inaccurate, that had it being reported correctly, would have resulted in a decrease in your interest rates? If so, then you may be able to argue that the difference between "good rate" and "bad rate" would be actual damages; any stress related medical issues that the stress of the situation exacerbates, see where you may be able to find the damages? The challenge on (2) is "WILLFUL" violation. "act done voluntarily with either an intentional disregard of, or plain indifference to" The willful standard sets a pretty high 2-prong bar. First, they have to be acting voluntarily. Second, they have to be intentionally thumbing their noses at the law. Locally, the news has been regularly featuring a guy who has been in court for his 39th traffic citation, despite his license being revoked, he WILLFULLY gets behind the wheel, justifying it by saying I have to go to work to support my family. Yet, for his 39th traffic hearing, the reporter asked him, at the time when you were pulled over for THIS violation, were you trying to get to work. NOPE.
