Ran across this while searching for the dratted EQ case and thought some of it might apply. Only posting the part that caught my eye. I thought I had grabbed the caption, too, but apparently they have that in a different frame. And I am not going back to find it. I hate Westlaw! 108A Credit Reporting Agencies   108Ak3 k. Liability for False Information. Most Cited Cases Denial of loan application submitted by consumers at automobile dealership did not support claim for actual damages against credit reporting agency on grounds that agency breached duty under Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) to follow reasonable procedures to ensure maximum possible accuracy in preparing consumer report, inasmuch as there was no evidence, other than consumers' own affidavit, that loan was denied based on credit report issued by agency, and consumers' lack of personal knowledge of basis for loan denial prevented affidavit from linking denial to agency. Consumer Credit Protection Act, § 607(b), as amended, 15 U.S.C.A. § 1681e(b). Also...in regards to statute of limitations (at least I got the caption this time ) Whitesides v. Equifax Credit Information Services, Inc. 125 F.Supp.2d 807 W.D.La.,2000. Dec. 4, 2000. (Approx. 5 pages) Victim of credit card fraud brought suit against bank which had extended credit in victim's name to perpetrator of fraud, and then reported delinquencies in account to consumer reporting agencies, asserting claims for negligence, defamation, intentional infliction of emotional distress, unfair trade practices, and violation of Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). Bank moved for summary judgment. The District Court, Walter, J., held that: (1) tort claims were not based on disclosures made pursuant to mandatory disclosure requirements of FCRA, and thus were not subject to FCRA's liability limitation; (2) two-year FCRA limitations period began to run anew with each request for credit information from bank, and resulting denial of credit based on outstanding fraudulent account; and (3) fact issue as to whether bank had discharged its obligation under FCRA to investigate dispute, and report results of investigation to appropriate consumer reporting agencies, precluded summary judgment. Motion denied.
