Butch- Only holes in your argument that I see are: 1) the FTC case was not decided, it was settled..no precedent there 2) you jump to the conclusion of what the FTC opinion is regarding reporting disputes, then concede that it's an inference. IMO, you won't find any case law on the subject...but good luck trying.
SHAME ON YOU, Stan! Enough already, Amen brother Marc! FCRA Section 623. Responsibilities of furnishers of information to consumer reporting agencies [15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2] (a) Duty of furnishers of information to provide accurate information. (3) Duty to provide notice of dispute. If the completeness or accuracy of any information furnished by any person to any consumer reporting agency is disputed to such person by a consumer, the person may not furnish the information to any consumer reporting agency without notice that such information is disputed by the consumer. Tix, Did your attorney not pursue violations of the FCRA as well? Stan, You need links to the FCRA, FDCPA and the Staff Opinion letters for both so you can actually read them or what? Sassy
In support of Stan's position on this matter, do note that the judge determined that accurate information was in fact reported in a "reasonable" amount of time, 4 months. For that matter, the judge did not ignore any laws.... I believe that there was also a failure by the plaintiff to cite any cases deciding what a "reasonable" amount of time was--this is why case law matters.
So, as the end result of all this; The Collection Agencies now have CASE LAW to cite the next time they are sued for not marking the account in dispute within 4 MONTHS..... *sigh*
LMBO, PAE...you ever heard of anyone citing small claims decisions? Are they even published? I just got a chuckle out of this...it hit me as funny L
Uhm actually if there is no precedent, FTC opinion should have been used. It does not require the judge to follow but holds a lot of weight. Butch was correct in bringing it up.
While it is true that this particular plaintiff had no case law regarding "reasonable amount of time" for CA to report item as disputed, nobody said that this small claims decision is precedent. It is quite possible that the decision would have been for the plaintiff if he/she had some case law re "reasonable amount of time."
FTC opinion letters do not necessarily hold weight at all. I cited several cases yesterday in which the court commented that the FTC misconstrued the statute.. Butch was referring to a case that was settled out of court. A settlement agreement is not precedent, and I would expect it to hold equal or lesser weight than an FTC opinion letter...
Only published decisions carry the weight of precedence. Small claims judges pay no attention to what other small claims judges do because they all know they're all idiots. IMO. Just struck me as kinda cute too, (in an endearing kinda way) I'm with Whyspers. Thanx Mecro.
