now this is a first. TRANS UNION CORP v FTC -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT Argued February 6,200l Decided April 13,200l No. 00-l 141 Trans Union Corporation, Petitioner V. Federal Trade Commission, Respondent On Petition for Review of an Order of the Federal Trade Commission Roger L. Longtin argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the brief was Stephen L. Agin. Lawrence DeMille-Wagman, Attorney, Federal Trade Commission, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Debra A. Valentine, General Counsel, and John F. Daly, Assistant General Counsel. Before: Edwards, Chief Judge, Ginsburg and Tatel, Circuit Judges. Opinion for the Court filed by Circuit Judge Tatel. Tatel, Circuit Judge: Petitioner, a consumer reporting agency, sells lists of names and addresses to target market- ers--companies and organizations that contact consumers with offers of products and services. The Federal Trade Commission determined that these lists were "consumer re- ports" under the Fair Credit Reporting Act and thus could no longer be sold for target marketing purposes. Challenging this determination, petitioner argues that the Commission's decision is unsupported by substantial evidence and that the Act itself is unconstitutional. Because we find both argu- ments without merit, we deny the petition for review. I Petitioner Trans Union sells two types of products. First, SNIPPETS: Federal Trade Commission, Roger L. Longtin argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the brief were Debra A. Valentine, General Counsel, and John F. Daly, Assistant Opinion for the Court filed by Circuit Judge Tatel. Tatel, Circuit Judge: Petitioner, a consumer reporting agency, sells lists of names and The Federal Trade Commission determined that these lists were "consumer reports" under the Because we find both arguments without merit, we deny the petition for review. Petitioner Trans Union sells two types of products. MasterFile consists of information about every consumer in the company's credit database who The FCRA defines "consumer report" as: Finding that the information Trans Union sold was "collected in whole or in part by with the ting lists, id. See In re Trans Union Corp., Opinion of the Commission, No. 9255, slip op. See FTC Opinion at 16- 17. "Prescreening" involves selecting individuals for guaranteed offers of credit or insurance. "Credit scoring models" are statistical models for predicting credit performance that are Court refused to defer to the NLRB's interpretation of a provision of the NLRA because the The Commission cites testimony and other record evidence that support its finding that [ Back to Top | You will have full access to this document in your browser, immediate after purchase. | Back to Top ] Terms of Use | Privacy Policy Copyright © 2003 Ives Inc
fun: You just walked in on my treasure trove... Read the 80+ page FTC Opinion on the target marketing profiles, and you'll see a wealth of information, some of which comes from TU itself's own marketing materials, and pr statements, about basing the target marketing reports off of the credit file information without a pp, and without plans to offer a firm offer of credit or insurance.
Jam Ill check it out and get back 2 ya. Is this where your getting your info also? there is a wealth of info out there if you have the time to research and read knowledge= power
That is one of the poison dart guns... Part of the FTC's case against TU (which TU then sued the FTC, for violating their right of freedom of speech -- we have the right to sell consumers information to anyone we want to, for any reason) was quotes from TU's target marketing divisions own marketing materials, and statements from the head of that division... One of the quotes was related to their companies decision, albeit short lived, to stop selling target marketing reports based directly off of certain credit file criteria, explicitly stating that the changes to the FCRA (the last before FACTA) made the cost/benefit analysis to great, since consumers now had a cause of action + damages against them.
jam so how are you using this case to your advantage? it's obvious the CRA are still doing this despite the risk involved.
Knowledge is power, even when they don't know that you know... The major thing is the Federal Trade Commission's opinion that any report which is based on criteria, even if its only a PRM is an actual CONSUMER CREDIT REPORT, because it allows them the ability to reverse engineer the major parts of your credit file. The scariest part is where TU was claiming that even a target marketing report for "People with combined credit limits of over $100,000.00" didn't constitute EVEN A PRM status, and they believed they had a first amendment right to SELL those target marketing reports. How I am leveraging it may be a topic for future discussion...
Fun, there are others, since that case went up to the Supremes... Re: Target Marketing Reports Desent by Justices Kennedy, and O'Connor; who mistakenly don't see the LIMITS section of the PRM portion of the FCRA, and are under the mistaken impression that the PRM inquiry includes all of the consumers credit file, and not just the above the fold information; which makes them think that the FTC's dispute of the CRA's target marketing reports disclosure of just the name and the address based on criteria in the credit file is hypocritical. It's also hysterical how they claim that the Supreme Court's ruling could put them into BK... Wonder if that'ld get reported right by the 3 major CRAs... (or should I say the 2 remaining major CRAs) Re: CRA's as financial institutions under Graham Lehey Re-hearing on target marketing lists denied. Re: Target Marketing Lists.
wow jam your the research legal eagle thx for the info I will look it up when I get time printing it now for future use.
