FYI: Found this list . . . http://www.bayhouse.com/credit-forum/showthread.php?threadid=928 - - many of these FCRA violations have been discussed on credit.net. However, maybe others could update with new entries and what they are doing to rectify them. Common fact patterns which make for good cases: [1] Mixed credit files [common names, Sr-Jr, etc., women with similar names in same zip codes, people with same last name and first name initial living on the same RR address]; [2] all theft of ID cases; [3] Authorized users being reported [where a NON-spouse has his/her credit disparaged due to being listed as an AU on another's account, etc. Includes BK reportings based on AU status. Includes mixed files involving AU status; Avoid spousal AU cases as ECOA, arguably, mandates reporting about spouse. The good cases are the minor children and non-spouse AU cases]; [4] Insurers failing to provide adverse action notices to consumer [ie, that insurer pulled credit report and report was used, in whole or in part, to raise premiums or deny any other benefit]; [5] impermissible access to credit reports [one party in lawsuit pulls another's credit report; domestic suit lawyers pulling reports on adverse party; politicians pulling reports on others; lawyers pulling reports on jurors; police agencies pulling reports on suspects; insurers pulling reports for claims adjustment purposes; car dealers shopping loans; car dealers salesmen trolling databases and pulling reports for illicit purposes, etc. There are many types of these cases]; [6] Junk debt buyers altering the date of last activity and re-posting data to a consumer's credit report after the lawful retention period has expired [this is a widespread issue]; [7] Previously deleted data reappearing on credit reports due to suppression function deficiencies or other reasons; [8] Public records items mis-posting to wrong consumer's credit reports [part of mixed file problem but is a distinct type of issue that is widespread]; [9] Creditors attempting to collect $50 [or entire fraud charges] from victim. Creditors never comply with 15 USC 1643 and sec. 226.12 of Reg. Z and cannot ever collect the $50 permitted where a consumer lost or had stolen a card the consumer at one time had in his/her possession. In application fraud and account takeover/never received cases, the cards were never received by the consumer/victim. [10] Creditors/collectors/furnishers of info to credit bureaus fail to comply with their reinvestigation duties upon notice of a dispute. The FCRA [Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 USC 1681, et. seq.] calls for consumers to dispute inaccuracies to THE CREDIT BUREAUS [all three national reporting agencies, Experian, Equifax and Trans Union], who in turn per sec. 1681i[a] must convey the disputes to the furnishers and the furnishers [a legal term for creditors/collectors/persons who report data to the agencies]. The furnishers must conduct a reasonable and proper reinvestigation and respond with accurate information or suffer civil action under 1681s-2.
