With the cost of college and graduate school being as high as it is, many Americans take out student loans to attend school. It is not uncommon for people to struggle to keep up with their payments. According to a recent report from the Urban Institute, approximately 25% of student loans are delinquent. If you fall behind on your student loans, that information can be reported to the three major credit bureaus (Experian, TransUnion, and Equifax). There is a popular misconception that all derogatory student loan information ages off your credit report in approximately seven years. Unfortunately, that is not entirely true.  

While negative information on your private student loans does age off after approximately seven years, like any other account, the story is different when it comes to Federal student loans.  The grace period for a Federal student loan depends on whether it is a Federal Family Education Loan (FFEL), a Direct Student Loan, or a Perkins Loan. At The Kim Law Firm, LLC, our credit report attorney helps borrowers understand their rights and protect their best interests. 

The Different Types of Credit Reports and Student Loans

Private Student Loans

Private student loans were relatively common prior to major federal reforms in 2010. After that time, there were still many private student loan issues, though they were somewhat less common. However, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) is bringing big changes to the student loan system in 2026, including putting new statutory caps on federal student loans per year for parents, graduate students, and professional students. Many experts expect a significant increase in the number of new private student loans issued this year. Of course, there are also already many billions in outstanding private student loan debt. 

For credit reports, private student loan debt is treated the same as other private loan debt. Credit reporting agencies generally follow the credit bureaus’ reporting standards. A private student loan account will typically remain on your credit report for as long as the account is active and in good standing. Even after the loan is paid in full, the account may continue to appear on your credit history for a period of time as a positive or closed account. If a private student loan becomes delinquent or goes into default, negative information can be reported. In most cases, delinquency, charge-offs, and collection accounts related to private student loans may remain on a credit report for up to seven years from the date of the first missed payment that led to the default. The key date is the Date of First Delinquency (DOFD) that led to the default and charge-off. The seven-year reporting period runs from that date, not from the later charge-off.

Direct Student Loans and (FFEL) Loans

Direct student loans are treated the same way as FFELs (which include guaranteed student or Stafford Loans, SLS Loans, and PLUS Loans) on credit reports. FFELs are loans owed to a lender, guaranteed by a guaranty agency, and reinsured by the United States. In contrast, a Direct Student Loan is a loan directly between a student and the United States. However, Federal Student Aid explains that the FFEL program was eliminated as of 2010. Still, the United States Department of Education estimates that there is still more than $100 billion in FFEL debt outstanding. The Direct Student Loan program is much larger. The Higher Education Act provides how long derogatory information relating to these different types of Federal loans can be credit reported. For instance, FFEL and Direct Student Loans may only be reported seven years from the latest of the three dates: 

• When the Secretary of Education or the guaranty agency pays a claim to the loan holder on the guaranty. This can take place months or even years after default, and, in effect, is the date the guaranty agency of the United States takes over the loan; 
• When the Secretary of Education, guaranty agency, lender, or any other loan holder first reported the account to a credit reporting agency; and 
• If a borrower re-enters repayment after defaulting on a loan, and subsequently goes into default on the loan. See 20 U.S.C. § 1080a(f).  

In other words, the reporting period for defaulted federal student loans does not always start when the borrower first misses a payment. Instead, the law allows the seven-year clock to begin based on certain later events tied to how the federal loan system works. For example, the period may start when the government or a guaranty agency pays a claim on the loan after default, or when the account is first reported to a credit bureau. If a borrower later rehabilitates the loan and then defaults again, the clock may restart based on that later default. 

As a result, the timing for when negative information falls off a credit report can be more complicated for federal student loans than for most other types of debt. Unfortunately, it is also generally less borrower-friendly. The reason is that the seven-year reporting clock for many debts starts from the date of first delinquency. For federal student loans, the statute allows the reporting period to run from later events. Those events can occur months or even years after the borrower initially defaults. In practical terms, that means the negative entry can remain on a credit report for more than seven years after the borrower first stopped making payments. 

Perkins Loans

A Perkins Loan is an obligation owed to a school as a lender that may be assigned to the United States if the student does not repay the loan. Perkins Loans, however, are not subject to any limit on the amount of time that they may be negatively reported.  Perkins Loans may be reported until the loans are paid in full. See 20 U.S.C. § 1087cc(c)(3).  Importantly, however, the Third Circuit has held that once a loan that has derogatory credit information is finally paid off, the creditor can only report negative account information seven years from the date of first delinquency.  See Seamans v. Temple Univ., 744 F.3d 853, 863 (3d Cir. 2014). In other words, the negative information does not stay on your credit report forever.  The obvious policy objective is to incentivize borrowers to pay off their student loans with the eventual benefit of having their credit report corrected. 

While Perkins Loans can stay on a credit report for longer than seven years, they also have some additional options for rehabilitation. Federal regulations allow borrowers who have defaulted on a Perkins Loan to restore the loan to good standing by making a series of voluntary, on-time payments under a rehabilitation agreement. If the borrower successfully completes the required payments, the default designation may be removed from the credit report, and the loan may be returned to normal repayment status. The borrower must still repay the balance owed, but rehabilitation can substantially reduce the long-term credit damage associated with a defaulted Perkins Loan.

An Overview of How the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) Protects Student Loan Borrowers

Student loan debt, public and private, can be reported to credit report companies. When the information reported is accurate, that reporting is generally lawful. However, when a lender, loan servicer, debt collector, or credit bureau reports inaccurate or misleading information, the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) provides important legal protections for borrowers. The FCRA is a federal law that regulates how credit information is collected, reported, investigated, and corrected. Here is an overview of how the FCRA protects student loan borrowers: 

• You Have the Right to Accurate Credit Reporting: What is on your credit report matters. The information should always be fair, updated, and accurate. The FCRA requires that all information reported to credit bureaus must be accurate and not misleading. Lenders and loan servicers that report student loan accounts are considered “furnishers” of information under federal law. These entities must take reasonable steps to ensure that the information they provide is correct. For example, a loan servicer cannot lawfully report a borrower as delinquent if the borrower is current on his or her payments or he or she is enrolled in an approved repayment program. 
• You Have the Right to Dispute Incorrect Student Loan Information: If there is a student loan-related error on your credit report, you are not without legal options. Quite the contrary, borrowers have the right to dispute inaccurate or incomplete credit information. Your notice of dispute under the FCRA can be filed directly with the credit reporting agency. You can and should generally also notify a responsible student loan servicer, lender, and/or debt collector. Once the credit bureau receives the dispute, it must also notify the company that furnished the information and initiate a reinvestigation. 
• Credit Bureaus have a Duty Conduct a Reasonable Investigation: Credit reporting agencies have a legal obligation to conduct a comprehensive, reasonable investigation once a dispute from a consumer is received. That means that they cannot simply ignore the borrower’s complaint or rely entirely on automated responses from the loan servicer. The investigation must evaluate the specific issues raised by the consumer. A cursory review of the records is not sufficient to comply with the law. If the bureau determines that the information is inaccurate or cannot be verified, it must delete or correct the entry. To be clear, the duty applies whether you have a private student loan or any type of federal student loan. 
• Student Loan Services and Lenders Have a Duty to Investigate Disputed Information: The FCRA requires student loan servicers and lenders to also have independent responsibilities once they receive notice of a dispute. Under the law, furnishers must review the information provided by the credit bureau and conduct their own investigation into the accuracy of the account. They must report the results of that investigation to the credit bureau and correct any information that is inaccurate or incomplete. A servicer cannot continue reporting information it knows, or should know, is incorrect. If they do so, they are in violation of the FCRA and may be held legally liable. 
• You Have the Right to Seek Damages for FCRA Violations: An error on your credit report can cause you tangible financial harm. It could lead to higher interest rates, a denial of credit, and a wide range of other problems. When lenders, loan servicers, or credit reporting agencies fail to comply with the FCRA, borrowers may have the right to pursue legal remedies. The statute allows consumers to recover damages if inaccurate information remains on their credit report after a proper dispute was initiated. In some cases, borrowers may be entitled to compensation for actual damages, statutory damages, attorney’s fees, and court costs. If you have any questions about what type of damages you can seek, an experienced FCRA lawyer can help. 

How Attorney Richard H. Kim Can Help

For student loan borrowers, navigating issues related to late payments, delinquencies, forbearance, defaults, and credit reports can be complicated. Richard H. Kim is a consumer rights lawyer with the knowledge, skills, and professional experience people can trust. With extensive experience handling FCRA claims, Attorney Kim is prepared to review your case and help you take action to correct any adverse information that is improperly included on your credit report. In some cases, student loan borrowers may even be entitled to recover financial compensation because of an error. 

Contact Our Consumer Rights Attorney Today

At The Kim Law Firm, LLC, we are committed to protecting the legal rights and financial interests of consumers, including student loan borrowers. If you have any specific questions or concerns about adverse student loan information and your credit report, we are here as a legal resource. Call us today or contact us online for a fully confidential initial consultation. Our firm provides nationwide legal representation to student loan borrowers in credit report error cases. 

The post Federal Student Loans: What Type of Loan You Have and Why it Matters appeared first on The Kim Law Firm, LLC.

Background: What is the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA)

The Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) is a federal law that protects consumers from inaccurate, unfair, or outdated information in their credit reports. Congress enacted the statute in order to help promote accuracy, fairness, and privacy in the nation’s credit reporting system. As credit reports are extremely important for a consumer’s financial standing, the law matters. Notably, it applies to all three of the major credit reporting agencies (Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion). It also governs companies that furnish information to those agencies, including banks, lenders, debt collectors, and even some employers. If a company reports false information about you or fails to properly investigate a dispute, it may violate federal law. 

The FCRA includes a private right of action. That means that it gives you enforceable rights and provides remedies when those rights are ignored. Under the FCRA, you have the right to obtain a copy of your credit report, dispute inaccurate entries, and demand a reasonable investigation. Credit reporting agencies must correct or delete information that cannot be verified. The law also restricts who may access your report and requires certain disclosures before an employer can use it for hiring decisions. If a company willfully or negligently violates the statute, you may recover actual damages, statutory damages, attorney’s fees, and potentially even punitive damages.

How the FCRA Applies in the Hiring Process

As noted previously, an employer can potentially be covered by the FCRA. The federal law regulates the use of consumer reports and investigative consumer reports for employment purposes. When an employer obtains a background check from a third party, that report qualifies as a consumer report under 15 U.S.C. § 1681a(d). Employers are required to satisfy specific legal regulations. Here is the big FCRA requirement for employers: 

• Before procuring a credit report, an employer must provide a clear and conspicuous written disclosure in a standalone document stating that it may obtain a consumer report for employment purposes. The employer must obtain the applicant’s written authorization.

If an employer intends to take adverse action based in whole or in part on information contained in a consumer report, the FCRA imposes a two-step notice process under 15 U.S.C. § 1681b(b)(3). First, the employer must provide a pre-adverse action notice that includes a copy of the report and a summary of rights under the FCRA. It is a step that gives a job applicant a meaningful opportunity to dispute inaccuracies before a final decision. After a reasonable waiting period, assuming that the employer proceeds, it must issue a formal adverse action notice.

Note: The FCRA also regulates the conduct of consumer reporting agencies that prepare employment background checks. Agencies must follow reasonable procedures to ensure maximum possible accuracy. For investigative consumer reports, which involve interviews about character or reputation, the FCRA requires additional disclosures under 15 U.S.C. § 1681d. Employers and background screening companies that fail to comply face liability for actual damages, statutory damages for willful violations, attorney’s fees, and, potentially, punitive damages. 

Proposed Class Action Lawsuit: AI Hiring Tool and FCRA (Eightfold AI Inc.)

Artificial intelligence (AI) has already started to transform hiring. For businesses and organizations, one big promise is that AI-related tools can help them sift through large applicant pools with advanced algorithmic screening. Among other things, these types of systems can analyze résumés, match skills to job requirements, and generate predictive scores that rank candidates based on their “likelihood of success” in a role. Indeed, many companies now use AI-based platforms to augment or even replace parts of the traditional hiring pipeline. While these innovations promise efficiency, they also raise some very serious legal questions when they rely on extensive personal data and produce evaluations that influence who gets a job. It is this tension that lies at the heart of a newly filed lawsuit against Eightfold AI Inc. 

In January of 2026, two job applicants filed a proposed class action lawsuit in California state court against Eightfold AI, alleging that the company’s AI hiring tools violate federal and state consumer reporting laws. The proposed class action alleges a violation of the federal FCRA and seeks the certification of a nationwide class of plaintiffs. What are the specific allegations? 

• The complaint alleges that Eightfold’s system compiles detailed profiles about job seekers by pulling data from sources beyond what applicants voluntarily provide, such as online professional profiles and third-party databases. The plaintiffs contend that Eightfold uses this data to generate a numerical “Match Score” and other assessments that employers allegedly use to screen candidates before any human review. According to the proposed class action lawsuit, these evaluations function similarly to “consumer reports” under the FCRA because they contain information about an applicant’s personal characteristics and are furnished to employers for employment decisions.

The core of the legal claim is that Eightfold and its employer clients failed to comply with FCRA’s procedural safeguards. Under the statute, entities that prepare or furnish consumer reports must disclose that a report will be obtained, secure the subject’s written authorization, and provide access to the report along with a summary of rights before an adverse employment decision. The complaint alleges that Eightfold did none of these things: applicants were neither informed that their data was being collected and evaluated nor given the opportunity to review or correct information used to generate their Match Scores. In addition to FCRA claims, the lawsuit also asserts violations of the California Investigative Consumer Reporting Agencies Act (ICRAA) and seeks statutory and punitive damages on behalf of all similarly situated job seekers.

Understanding the FCRA Protections 

Protections Against an AI Company

When an employer uses an AI hiring tool to evaluate applicants, the FCRA may apply. However, it will depend on the specific circumstances. The FCRA is implicated if the tool compiles information about you and provides it to an employer for an employment decision. The statute does not turn on whether the report comes from a traditional credit bureau. It turns on whether a third party assembles information about your character, general reputation, personal characteristics, or mode of living and furnishes it for employment purposes. If an AI platform aggregates résumé data, online profiles, employment history, or other background information and generates a score or ranking that influences hiring, that output may qualify as a consumer report under 15 U.S.C. § 1681a(d). In that situation, you have the right to receive a clear, standalone disclosure and to provide written authorization before the employer obtains the report.

Protections Against an Employer

You also have specific procedural protections that will come into play if and when an employer intends to rely on that report to deny you a job. Before taking adverse action, the employer must provide you with a copy of the report and a Summary of Your Rights under the FCRA. This pre-adverse action notice gives you the opportunity to dispute inaccurate or incomplete information. The reporting company must conduct a reasonable reinvestigation if you challenge the data. If the violation is willful, you may pursue compensation for your damages and, potentially, additional damages. An experienced FCRA lawyer can help you determine the best course of action if your consumer rights were violated. 

The Potential Implications for this Proposed FCRA Class Action

If a court determines that an AI hiring platform such as Eightfold’s qualifies as a “consumer reporting agency” under 15 U.S.C. § 1681a(f), the implications will be immediate and significant. AI vendors would need to restructure onboarding, disclosure, authorization, and dispute procedures to comply with the FCRA’s strict statutory requirements. Employers that rely on algorithmic match scores or predictive rankings could face direct liability for failing to provide standalone disclosures and pre-adverse action notices. Even technical violations carry statutory damages of $100 to $1,000 per violation for willful noncompliance, plus punitive damages and attorney’s fees. 

The case also tests whether modern algorithmic scoring constitutes a “consumer report” when used for employment eligibility decisions. A ruling in favor of the plaintiffs could force AI hiring companies to dramatically increase transparency, provide additional access to underlying data, and to implement meaningful dispute mechanisms. That would reshape compliance expectations across the AI-driven hiring industry.

How Consumers Can Use the FCRA to Protect their Rights and their Interests 

The FCRA gives consumers practical tools to correct errors and hold companies accountable. To be clear, you do not have to accept inaccurate credit reporting, flawed background checks, or secretive employment screening. The statute creates affirmative rights and imposes enforceable duties on consumer reporting agencies and data furnishers. When you act promptly and document your efforts, you preserve evidence and strengthen your position. A proactive approach often determines whether a problem gets fixed quickly or turns into a legal claim. As a consumer, you can best protect your rights under the FCRA by taking the following steps: 

• Request and Review Your Credit Reports Regularly: To start, you should obtain your credit reports and any employment background reports. It is important to review things like account histories, public records, and personal identifiers for inaccuracies. Review matters. 
• Dispute Errors in Writing: You can and should send a written dispute to the reporting agency and the furnisher. It is a best practice to carefully and clearly identify each inaccurate item and demand a reasonable reinvestigation. 
• Preserve All Relevant Communications: Documentation is key for a successful FCRA claim. It is important to keep copies of dispute letters, delivery confirmations, and responses. You need to maintain a timeline of events that is reliable. 
• Be Prepared to Demand Pre-Adverse Action Compliance: If an employer relies on a report, insist on receiving a copy before any final decision.
• Consult an FCRA Attorney if Violations Persist: Willful or negligent noncompliance may entitle you to actual damages, statutory damages, punitive damages, and attorney’s fees. An experienced FCRA lawyer can help you seek the maximum compensation for your damages. 

Richard H. Kim is a Leading FCRA Attorney

Your credit report matters. The FCRA is a powerful legal tool for consumers who have run into problems because of credit report errors and related issues. Under the law, consumers have statutory rights to accurate reporting, reasonable investigations of disputes, and compensation for damages caused by willful or negligent violations of the law. However, the legal process can be challenging to navigate. Richard H. Kim is a leading FCRA attorney with a passion for fighting for justice for consumers. Indeed, he founded The Kim Law Firm, LLC with a mission to protect consumers harmed by inaccurate credit reporting, unfair background checks, and violations of federal financial privacy laws. For more than two decades, Attorney Kim has litigated complex matters in both state and federal courts nationwide. He has extensive FCRA experience that consumers can trust. 

Contact Our Credit Report Error Lawyer Today for Help With an FCRA Claim

At The Kim Law Firm, LLC, our credit report error attorney has the knowledge, skills, and experience to handle the full range of Fair Credit Reporting Act cases. If you have any questions about AI-related job hiring processes and your rights under the FCRA, we are here as a legal resource. Call us today or contact us online to set up a completely confidential, no obligation initial consultation. We handle credit report error cases nationwide. 

The post Proposed Class Action Lawsuit Will Test Bounds of AI Hiring Tools and the FCRA appeared first on The Kim Law Firm, LLC.

In October of 2025, the FCRA Liability Harmonization Act was introduced into the United States House of Representatives. The lead sponsor is Representative Barry Loudermilk of Georgia. Notably, the legislation, which has support from major creditors, debt collectors, and credit reporting agencies, would make the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) less favorable for consumers. At The Kim Law Firm, LLC, we are committed to protecting the rights and interests of people and families. Connect with our FCRA attorney to learn more about the proposed reforms. 

Background: The FCRA is a Fundamental Consumer Protection Law

The Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) is the primary federal law that regulates the collection, production, and sharing of credit reports and related consumer information. As what is on your credit report matters, the FCRA is a foundational consumer protection statute. It helps to ensure that consumer credit information is collected, used, and shared in a proper (lawful) manner. 

Along with other things, the FCRA was enacted to promote accuracy, fairness, and privacy. It regulates credit reporting agencies, furnishers of information, and entities that access consumer reports. Notably, the law imposes affirmative duties to maintain reasonable procedures that ensure maximum possible accuracy and limits the purposes for which credit data may be obtained. 

Beyond that, the FCRA grants consumers enforceable legal rights. Some of the most important rights that you have under the law are the right to access your credit reports, dispute inaccurate or incomplete information, and receive notice when adverse actions rely on credit data. As the statute includes a private right of action, you can sue if you suffer damages due to an FCRA violation. 

The FCRA Liability Harmonization Act Introduced in Congress to Reform the Law

Key lawmakers are seeking to reform federal consumer protection law. The bill is called the FCRA Liability Harmonization Act. As noted, it was recently introduced in the House by Representative Barry Loudermilk (H.R. 5775). Among other things, the bill seeks to reform how civil liability works under the FCRA. Most notably, it would change the law’s class action provisions by placing caps on statutory damages, eliminating punitive damages, and limiting attorneys’ fees and total recovery amounts in class suits. The goal, as argued by its supporters, is to align FCRA liability standards with other federal consumer protection laws. 

Of course, not everyone supports the law. Indeed, the proposed reforms are very much unfavorable to the consumer. As currently drafted, the FCRA Liability Harmonization Act would weaken consumer protections. Consumer advocacy groups are clear: The reforms proposed in this legislation could allow large credit bureaus and data furnishers to escape real accountability even after systemic errors damage scores, lending, housing, or jobs. Critics also fear that limits on statutory and punitive damages and attorneys’ fees will deter lawyers from taking valid cases. Sadly, that could leave consumers who have been harmed without accessible remedies. 

An Overview of the Changes in the Proposed Bill (Unfavorable for the Consumer)

For consumers who are interested in making their voice heard, it is useful to understand some of the specific ways in which this proposed federal law would actually weaken the protections offered by the FCRA. Here is a more comprehensive overview of the proposed changes in the FCRA Liability Harmonization Act: 

• A Cap On Statutory Damages (Class Action): The FCRA Liability Harmonization Act would impose a hard cap on total statutory damages recoverable in class action lawsuits. Under current law, statutory damages in FCRA cases can range per plaintiff without a collective limit. Courts have the authority to award meaningful sums when widespread harm occurs. The proposed bill limits total class action damages to a fixed ceiling regardless of the number of affected consumers. The proposed change is bad for consumers because it removes the deterrent effect of uncapped statutory damages. When millions of people suffer similar credit report errors, a global cap means tiny per-person awards that do not reflect the scale of harm. Bad actors could treat the cap as a cost of doing business. 
• The Elimination of Punitive Damages for Willful Violations: The Act would eliminate punitive damages in FCRA class actions. Punitive damages punish especially egregious or reckless conduct and supplement actual and statutory damages. Current FCRA law allows punitive awards in willful violation cases, giving courts a tool to penalize companies that flagrantly ignore consumers’ rights. The proposed change is harmful because punitive damages serve as a meaningful deterrent against intentional or reckless violations. Without them, companies that repeatedly violate consumer rights may face only modest statutory and actual damages, even when their conduct harms many consumers deeply. The absence of punitive awards weakens accountability and reduces the consequences of willfully failing to follow the law.
• A Limit on Consumers’ Ability to Recover Attorneys’ Fees: Finally, the bill also seeks to put sharp limits on a consumer’s ability to recover attorneys’ fees through a successful FCRA claim. Under current FCRA statutory provisions, prevailing plaintiffs may recover reasonable attorney’s fees and costs. That matters because it makes it practical for lawyers to take on complex, resource-intensive class actions even when individual claims are small. Fee recovery is central to access to justice in federal consumer law. Capping or limiting attorney fees is bad for consumers because it undermines access to experienced legal representation. Complex FCRA claims require significant time and expertise. If lawyers cannot expect fair compensation, fewer will file class actions, especially for cases where individual damages are low. Consumers would face higher barriers to challenging systemic credit reporting errors. 

Creditors, Debt Collectors, and Credit Reporting Agencies Want to Limit Their Liability 

Notably, the FCRA Liability Harmonization Act is not a favorable law for consumers. It narrows their ability to recover damages through a credit report error claim. Major industry groups are in favor of the proposed reform. For example, ACA International, which advocates for data collection agencies, has come out in support of the law. Further, the Consumer Data Industry Association (CDIA), which represents the major credit reporting agencies, is also in favor of the proposed law. Finally, the American Bankers Association has publicly expressed its support for the FCRA Liability Harmonization Act. 

What is Next: The FCRA Liability Harmonization Act has Many More Steps to Become Law

It is important to emphasize that this bill is not currently law. The FCRA Liability Harmonization Act is a proposed bill. After its introduction in the House of Representatives in October of 2025, it was referred to the House Financial Services Committee and the Judiciary Committee for review and debate. There are still many steps in the legislative process. Among other things, the committees may hold hearings, amend the text, and vote on whether to advance it to the full House. If the House passes the bill, it moves to the Senate for similar committee review and a Senate floor vote. 

Only after both chambers pass identical text can it go to the President for signature or veto. The process can take months or longer and often involves negotiation, revision, and lobbying from supporters and opponents. Even if passed by Congress, the President’s choice to sign, veto, or let it become law without a signature will determine its ultimate fate. Still, even though there is a long way to go, the FCRA Liability Harmonization Act does have some key support in Congress. It is also heavily supported by the creditors, debt collectors, and the credit reporting agencies. Consumers need to be prepared to make their voices heard as well. 

Key Point: The proposal does not change existing rights. As a consumer who has been subject to an error, your rights today are the same as they were before this bill was introduced. You can still obtain reports, dispute inaccuracies, and pursue claims under current law. Documentation matters. Written disputes matter. Pattern violations matter. Monitoring legislative developments helps, but immediate action protects credit standing today. Consumers can also engage in the process by contacting representatives, submitting public comments, or supporting advocacy organizations.

Why Credit Reporting Errors Remain a Systemic Issue

The unfortunate reality is that credit report mistakes remain a systematic and widespread problem. Indeed, reporting errors are not isolated events. They stem from automated reporting, high data volume, weak dispute handling, and fragmented responsibility between bureaus and furnishers. Errors often persist across multiple reports and resurface after deletion. Consumers bear the burden of correction despite limited access to underlying data systems. Any reform that reduces enforcement pressure risks reinforcing these systemic flaws. Accuracy improves when consequences are real. Compliance improves when oversight is costly to ignore. A high priority should be placed on consumer protection. 

You Can Take Action to Get Errors on Your Credit Report Corrected and Seek Damages

Were you the victim of a material error on your credit report? You have the right to take action to get the problem corrected and to seek financial compensation for any damages. Indeed, you can take direct action when your credit report contains errors. You should generally start by obtaining your full reports from all major credit bureaus. It is best to review each line item and to look for accounts that do not belong to you, incorrect balances, duplicate tradelines, outdated negative entries, or wrong payment histories. 

If you identify an error, you can and should submit a written dispute to the credit reporting agency. Notably, you may have a claim involving multiple (or all three) of the major credit bureaus. In submitting your written dispute, you should be specific. Along with other things, that means clarifying the exact information at issue and explaining why it is inaccurate. You should include supporting documentation. The FCRA requires the credit report bureau to conduct a reasonable investigation and correct or delete information that cannot be verified.

To be clear, the obligation does not stop with the credit bureau. Furnishers of information also have an independent duty to report accurately and to investigate disputes forwarded to them. Indeed, they must correct errors at the source. If they fail to do so, they are also in direct violation of federal law. You are not required to accept repeated “verified” responses that ignore clear proof. Pattern failures, form responses, and superficial investigations matter. They are evidence of liability.

Key Point: When a violation of the FCRA causes you any type of financial harm, you have the right to seek damages. The FCRA allows recovery for financial losses, emotional distress, and any out-of-pocket costs. In willful cases, you may also recover statutory damages and even punitive damages. Further, attorney’s fees may be recoverable through an FCRA claim as well. A top-rated credit report error lawyer can help you take action to get justice and the maximum available compensation. 

Why Trust Credit Report Error Lawyer Richard H. Kim for an FCRA Case

A credit report error can cause serious harm to your finances. Inaccurate, outdated, or otherwise incorrect information on your credit report could make it more challenging for you to get a loan, credit card, mortgage, or a reasonable interest rate. The FCRA allows you to bring a claim to seek a correction of the problem and financial compensation for your damages. Richard H. Kim is a consumer protection lawyer with extensive experience handling FCRA cases. We know the law, and we know how to protect the legal rights and financial interests of our clients. People and families trust The Kim Law Firm, LLC for proactive, solutions-focused legal representation. Your initial consultation with our FCRA attorney for credit report errors is fully confidential. 

Speak to Our FCRA Lawyer for a Confidential Consultation

At The Kim Law Firm, LLC, our credit report error attorney is well-versed in FCRA cases. If you have any questions about your rights or your options under the law, we are here as a resource that you can trust. Call us today or contact us online to arrange your completely confidential, no obligation initial case review. We handle credit report error cases nationwide. 

The post A Bill Was Introduced in the House of Representatives that Would Make the FCRA Less Consumer-Friendly  appeared first on The Kim Law Firm, LLC.

On October 28, 2025, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) published a new “preemption” rule in the Federal Register. The agency clarified its view that the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) preempts state law related to the handling and maintenance of consumers’ credit reports. It is important because it replaces (and effectively reverses) a 2022 CFPB rule that held that federal preemption related to the FCRA was narrow. Broader preemption prevents individual states from enacting stricter regulations for credit reports. At The Kim Law Firm, LLC, our FCRA attorneys help consumers understand and assert their rights under the FCRA. 

Background: What is Preemption?

As a starting point, it is important to understand what preemption is and how it works from a legal perspective. Broadly explained, preemption is the legal doctrine that allows a higher level of government to displace or override the laws of a lower level. Under American law, preemption is generally an issue that impacts the extent to which states can make regulations that are different from federal law. Federal preemption arises under the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution. When Congress enacts legislation within its constitutional authority, federal law controls even if a state or local rule points in another direction. Courts apply several forms of preemption, including express preemption, field preemption, and conflict preemption. 

Preemption analysis focuses on legislative intent and operational conflict. A state or local rule becomes unenforceable if it frustrates the purposes or objectives of the governing federal statute. In other words, a federal court could find that a state law, in some manner, differs from the purpose of federal law and that it effectively undermines federal law in the process. On those grounds, the state law (or local law) can be ruled unconstitutional and unenforceable. As a simple example, there is a federal motor carrier safety rule that requires mandatory brake-inspection intervals for commercial trucks. If a state enacts a different interval that forces carriers to follow a conflicting timeline, the federal rule controls the matter because simultaneous compliance is impossible. That state law would be “preempted,” and it would be unenforceable. 

The New CFPB Rule Holds that the FCRA Broadly Preempts Federal Law

In October of 2025, the CFPB issued an interpretive rule that clarifies the scope of federal preemption under the FCRA. The rule states that the FCRA generally preempts state laws that impose “any requirement or prohibition.” In issuing this interpretive rule, the agency revoked its prior (July 2022) guidance that took a far more narrow view of preemption. The CFPB explained that the older rule was flawed in light of the statute’s plain language and legislative history. 

Under the new rule, the CFPB affirms its view that Congress designed the FCRA’s preemption clause for broad coverage and to avoid a patchwork of state-by-state regulation of credit reporting. The interpretive rule does not itself invalidate any state law. Instead, it signals that parties can invoke more robust arguments that many state statutes (particularly those regulating the content of consumer reports) may be vulnerable to preemption challenges in court. 

What Does this Actually Mean for Consumers (Certain State Laws May Be Challenged)

Preemption is a highly technical legal issue. For many consumers, it can be difficult to parse what exactly has changed. The key point to know is that the CFPB’s old view was that the individual states could make laws that are “more consumer friendly” and that go beyond the protections offered by the FCRA. The CFPB’s new view is that states generally cannot do so, and the federal law (most notably, the FCRA) is the nationwide standard for credit reports. There are basically two issues where certain states are enacting more strict, comprehensive, and “consumer-friendly” credit report-related regulations that currently exist under the federal FCRA. Here is an overview of both of them: 

• Reporting of Medical Debt: Several states have adopted statutes that broadly restrict when and how medical debt can appear on consumer reports. These laws often impose waiting periods, mandate item-level verification, or prohibit reporting certain categories of medical obligations altogether. Under the CFPB’s new preemption interpretation, any state rule that regulates the content, timing, or furnishing of medical-debt information may now fall within the scope of 15 U.S.C. § 1681t(b)(1). That provision broadly bars state requirements that conflict with federal standards governing accuracy, completeness, and permissible reporting periods. The legal question becomes whether the state restriction regulates the same subject matter already covered by the FCRA. If so, the rule faces a significant risk of being preempted. Federal courts will analyze statutory text, operational impact, and whether the state rule attempts to add new obligations beyond the federal framework. 
• Reporting of Criminal Records: There are a number of different states that have also enacted aggressive limits on reporting criminal-history information. Some restrict the reporting of records older than a defined number of years. Others bar reporting of dismissed charges, non-convictions, or expunged matters. The FCRA already regulates “adverse information” through maximum reporting periods and accuracy obligations. Under the CFPB’s updated approach, state laws that impose additional filtering, timing, or record-classification rules may be treated as regulating the same subject matter addressed in 15 U.S.C. § 1681c. A court could view these statutes as attempts to create stricter content-control requirements than the federal scheme permits. If so, they may be vulnerable to facial or as-applied preemption challenges. 

It is important to clarify that the CFPB’s preemption rule is an interpretive statement. It does not carry the force of law in the way that a duly promulgated regulation would under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). Courts are not required to defer to it. That is not to say that the interpretive guidance is irrelevant. It matters. Federal judges often consider an agency’s reading of a statute when analyzing preemption, especially when the agency administers that statute. If a state medical-debt or criminal-record reporting law is challenged, the new CFPB interpretation may be cited as persuasive authority. It could influence how a court evaluates the scope of the FCRA preemption claim. Some state statutes may be more vulnerable to legal challenges. 

What Consumers Should Take Away From the Policy Guidance

The previous view of the CFPB was that individual states have considerable deference to enact credit report regulations that provide consumers in their jurisdiction with additional protection beyond what is offered by the Fair Credit Reporting Act. The CFPB’s current view is that individual states actually only have very limited authority to regulate credit reports. 

Some state statutes related to credit reports (such as state-level restrictions on the reporting of medical debt or criminal records) may be challenged on the grounds that they are preempted by federal law. Still, this is interpretative guidance. Courts are not required to follow the view of the CFPB. Even if a state law is challenged on preemption grounds, a court will need to review the specific nature of the regulation to determine whether or not it is unenforceable. 

You Can Use the FCRA to Correct Credit Report Errors and Get Compensation

Consumers often feel overwhelmed when a credit report contains inaccurate information. The Fair Credit Reporting Act gives you concrete rights. Even if certain state laws may be more vulnerable to legal challenges, it is crucial to know that the FCRA is still a very powerful tool for consumers. The law creates real obligations for credit reporting agencies and the furnishers that supply them with data. The statute is technical, but it is designed to give you tools you can actually use. Do not assume that you are powerless. Here are some key things to know about your rights and your options under the federal FCRA: 

• You Have a Right to a Free Copy of Your Credit Report: Federal law lets you request free reports from each major credit bureau every year. You can access them through AnnualCreditReport.com. As a general rule, there is no need to pay for a copy of your credit report. You can generally get them for free to review them on a periodic basis. The right matters because you cannot dispute an error you have not seen. You should review every page carefully. Look for incorrect personal information, duplicate accounts, outdated debts, or fraudulent activity. 
• You Have a Right to File a Formal Dispute Directly With the Credit Bureau: The FCRA requires credit bureaus to investigate disputes that are submitted with enough detail. Your dispute should identify the specific item and explain why it is inaccurate. Attach supporting documents. The bureau must complete its investigation within 30 days. If it cannot verify the account or the information is wrong, it must correct or delete the item. That correction is binding on all future reports.
• You Have a Right to Ensure that Furnishers Conduct Their Own Investigation: Banks, lenders, medical providers, and debt collectors are furnishers. When they receive a dispute from a credit bureau, they must perform a separate investigation. They must review relevant records and provide updated information. If they confirm an error, they must notify all credit bureaus. A failure to investigate can itself violate the FCRA. This creates an additional layer of protection for consumers.
• You Have a Right to Have Inaccurate Information Corrected or Removed: The FCRA does not allow a bureau or furnisher to “leave the item as-is” if they cannot verify accuracy. Any unverifiable account must come off the report. This requirement applies even if the furnisher believes the debt might exist but cannot produce documentation. The statute focuses on verifiable accuracy. That standard helps prevent old, incomplete, or speculative information from harming you.
• You Have a Right to Seek Damages for Willful or Negligent Violations: The FCRA provides compensation when a credit bureau or furnisher fails to meet its duties. If the violation is negligent, you can seek actual damages, including harm to your credit, higher interest rates, or financial losses. If the violation is willful, you can also seek statutory damages, punitive damages, and attorney’s fees. Courts require proof, so detailed documentation of your disputes is essential.

A big area of concern is that credit report mistakes do not stay isolated. Small errors can cause real problems. What is on your credit report can affect major life decisions. A single inaccurate delinquency can result in a denied mortgage, higher auto premiums, or lost employment opportunities. These are real-world consequences. They can be the basis of an FCRA claim. FCRA cases can be hard to navigate. The right lawyer can help. A consumer protection attorney can evaluate your dispute history, gather documentation, and build the strongest possible claim. The dispute process is not just about fixing one item. It is about restoring your overall financial reputation. Clean credit reports help you secure better interest rates, qualify for housing, and reduce long-term borrowing costs. Your attorney can pursue compensation for your damages. 

How Our Credit Report Error Lawyer Can Help You Use the FCRA to Protect Your Rights

The FCRA is among the most important federal consumer protection laws. If there is an error on your credit report, it is imperative that you take immediate action to protect your rights and your interests. Navigating FCRA cases can be challenging. You do not have to figure out everything on your own. Richard H. Kim is a top-rated credit report error lawyer. With extensive experience handling FCRA cases, Attorney Kim provides personalized, effective advocacy to consumers. 

Contact Our FCRA Attorney for a Completely Confidential Consultation

At The Kim Law Firm, LLC, our FCRA lawyers are skilled, knowledgeable, and committed to protecting the rights and interests of consumers. If you have any questions or concerns about how to challenge a credit report error, we are here to help. Call us today or contact us online for a completely confidential, no obligation initial case review. An error on your credit report can cause you financial harm. It is time to fight back. We provide FCRA representation nationwide. 

The post CFPB Announces New “Preemption” Rule for Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) appeared first on The Kim Law Firm, LLC.

In September of 2025, President Trump signed the Homebuyers Privacy Protection Act (HPPA) into law. A key provision in the federal legislation amends the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). Along with other things, the bill prohibits credit reporting agencies from providing a consumer’s credit report to a third party in connection with a residential mortgage transaction unless that specific consumer “opts in” to allow the agency to do so. Our credit report error lawyer discusses the law, explains what it means for the FCRA, and highlights key things that consumers should know about challenging an error on their credit report. 

An Overview of the Homebuyers Privacy Protection Act (HPPA)

The Homebuyers Privacy Protection Act (HPPA) was enacted on September 5, 2025. It amends the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) to address the longstanding issue of so-called “trigger leads” in relation to residential mortgages. Trigger leads are generated when a consumer applies for a mortgage, and a credit reporting agency (usually all three) records the inquiry. What is the issue? Prior to this law, credit reporting agencies could sell this inquiry information to competing lenders and brokers who would then solicit the consumer. The HPPA was designed to curb this practice. Many people view it as a serious invasion of consumer privacy. 

The statute creates a new limitation on when a credit reporting agency may furnish a consumer report in connection with a residential mortgage inquiry. As amended by the HPPA, the FCRA now prohibits CRAs from distributing these reports unless specific conditions are satisfied. Here is an overview of the requirements of the new federal law: 

• The disclosure must be tied to a “firm offer of credit or insurance.”
• The party receiving the report must fall into a narrowly defined set of categories, such as already having an existing relationship with the entity in question because that entity is the originator of the mortgage application, the current servicer of the mortgage loan, or a depository institution or credit union holding an active account for the consumer. 

Note: Alternatively, the information may be furnished if the consumer has expressly authorized it or affirmatively opted in to receive such offers from third parties. 

The Problem the HPPA is Designed to Address (Trigger Leads)

When you apply for a mortgage, the credit reporting agencies note your inquiry. In the past, they could take that information and sell it to other lenders or brokers. The practice is known as generating “trigger leads.” As soon as you start looking for a home loan, your personal details could be shared widely, and you might be bombarded with calls, texts, or mail from unfamiliar companies. 

Many borrowers found this confusing and even predatory, especially since they had never agreed to these contracts. Further, there were plenty of companies soliciting consumers with bad or even outright fraudulent offers. The Homebuyers Privacy Protection Act (HPPA) was created to fix this problem. Here are some specific issues consumers faced without HPPA protections: 

• Unwanted Solicitations: Without restrictions on trigger leads, many homebuyers received dozens of calls, texts, and emails within hours of applying for a mortgage. For some people, the flood of solicitations was downright ridiculous. That can create some real stress at a time when families were already navigating the complicated loan process. 
• Confusion About Legitimate Offers: Consumers often had trouble distinguishing between their chosen lender and aggressive solicitors who purchased their data. Scammers and predatory lenders used the same information to pose as legitimate institutions. The confusion risked steering borrowers into unfavorable or even fraudulent agreements.
• Genuine Privacy Concerns: Applicants never gave explicit consent for their inquiry data to be sold or shared. Many felt their sensitive financial information was being exploited for profit. That matters for consumer protections. It eroded trust in the mortgage process and in the agencies responsible for safeguarding personal data.
• Higher Risk of Predatory Lending: Finally, trigger leads opened the door to lenders who targeted vulnerable consumers with high-cost or misleading loan products. Borrowers under time pressure sometimes accepted these offers without a full understanding. The lack of clear protections left consumers vulnerable to abusive lending practices.

The Bottom Line: The law gives you more control over who can access your information, so you are not overwhelmed with unwanted solicitations when you are trying to buy a home.

The Timeline for the New Law (180 Days Until it Takes Effect)

The law will not take full effect until 180 days have passed. In other words, HPPA will take effect early in 2026. At that point, CRAs, lenders, and mortgage brokers must adjust their practices to ensure conformity with the new statutory requirements. Because the HPPA amends the FCRA, enforcement mechanisms remain the same: the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) retains primary regulatory oversight. However, consumers may pursue private remedies under the FCRA’s civil liability provisions as well. 

The Law Also Requires the Government to Study the Issue More Comprehensively

Another notable provision of the HPPA is that it directs the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to conduct a formal study on the use of “trigger leads” in digital communications. The legislative history indicates that the lawmakers are especially interested in triggering leaders through text messages. The study must evaluate the benefits and risks of these solicitations and deliver a report to Congress within one year of the law’s enactment. It is significant because Congress may use the findings to expand restrictions beyond mortgage transactions. Alternatively, lawmakers may opt to impose additional protections on electronic marketing practices in the future. It is worth watching as the FCRA could potentially be expanded in other ways. 

How Specifically the HPPA Amended the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA)

The Homebuyers Privacy Protection Act (HPPA) amended the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) by narrowing the permissible purposes under which consumer reporting agencies may furnish consumer reports related to residential mortgage inquiries. Specifically, the HPPA prohibits the sale or distribution of “trigger leads” unless the report is connected to a firm offer of credit or insurance and the recipient qualifies as the originator, servicer, or current depository institution/credit union of the consumer, or has obtained the consumer’s express authorization. 

What Does it Mean that the FCRA has a Private Right of Action?

One of the key points to know about the HPPA, being an amendment to the FCRA, is that the FCRA has a private right of action. It is a very important tool for consumers. The FCRA allows individual consumers to file lawsuits directly against violators of the law. They do not have to merely rely on government enforcement. In the context of the Homebuyers Privacy Protection Act (HPPA), this is significant because consumers can sue credit reporting agencies or lenders that improperly use or sell trigger leads in violation of the new restrictions. The remedies may include actual damages, statutory damages, and attorneys’ fees. For willful violations, punitive damages may also be available, as that is a viable FCRA remedy in some cases. 

Steps to Take If Your Rights are Violated Under the FCRA’s New HPPA Provision

Do you believe that your rights were violated under the FCRA’s new HPPA provision? You will have legal options available once the law takes full effect next year. There is no retroactive clause in the statute. That means that a credit reporting agency sharing certain information regarding your interest in a mortgage is not necessarily a violation yet. However, it is important for consumers to know what to do to protect their rights and their interests once the law takes full effect: 

• Document the Violation of the Homebuyers Privacy Protection Act (HPPA): Documentation is the key to any legal claim. FCRA cases are no exception to the rule. With that in mind, the first step to dealing with a suspected HPPA violation is to keep a clear record of what happened. If you receive calls, texts, or solicitations after applying for a mortgage, note the dates, times, and the names of the companies involved. Along with other things, you should save emails, phone logs, or mailers that show your information was shared without authorization. Comprehensive documentation helps to form the foundation of a claim. 
• Exercise Your Right to Get a Copy of Your Credit Report Disclosure: The FCRA provides consumers with a wide range of different rights, including the right to get certain disclosures related to their credit report. More specifically, the federal law gives you the right to request information about who has accessed your credit report. Submitting this request allows you to verify whether a credit reporting bureau released your data to third parties. If you see entries from companies with which you have no relationship, that may indicate an HPPA violation. It is a step that helps establish the source of the improper disclosure.
• File a Written Dispute With the Credit Reporting Agency/Agencies: Once you identify a potential violation, send a written dispute to the credit report agency that released your information. It could be Experian, Equifax, TransUnion, any combination, or even all of these entities. You should be specific about the unauthorized disclosures and attach copies of any evidence you gathered. Under the FCRA, credit reporting agencies must investigate disputes and correct errors or unlawful disclosures. A timely, well-documented dispute also strengthens your case if litigation becomes necessary at some point in the future.
• Consult with an Experienced Consumer Protection Attorney: The FCRA includes a private right of action, which means you may file a lawsuit if your rights under the HPPA are violated. At the same time, the FCRA can be a complicated law for consumers to navigate. You do not have to figure out everything alone. An experienced attorney can assess the strength of your claim, advise you on litigation strategy, and ensure that deadlines are met. No matter your situation, an FCRA lawyer will help you determine the best course of action.
• Consider All Available Legal Remedies Under the FCRA: If many consumers have been harmed by similar practices, your claim may become part of a class action. Class actions are particularly effective in FCRA cases, as they allow consumers to pool resources and challenge systemic violations. You should consider all available remedies under the law. The FCRA provides a wide range of potential remedies, including actual damages, statutory damages, punitive damages for willful violations, and the recovery of attorneys’ fees.

Note: HPPA does not take effect until early 2026. That is 180 days after its September 5, 2025, enactment. The law will take full effect on March 4th, 2026. Until that compliance date, current FCRA rules still apply. Consumers should remain aware of the timeline before pursuing claims under the new law.

How FCRA Attorney Richard H. Kim Can Help

An error on your credit report can cause you serious financial harm. You have the right to challenge it and to take action to hold the responsible parties (or parties) accountable. That includes debt lenders, debt collection agencies, and/or the major credit reporting bureaus. Richard H. Kim is a consumer protection lawyer with the skills and experience to take on the full range of Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) cases. With a proactive approach and a proven record of success for clients, Attorney Kim will invest the time, resources, and attention to detail to protect your financial interests. You do not have to let an error on your credit report persist. You can take legal action to get it corrected and to recover financial compensation for the damages that you suffered.

Contact Our Credit Report Error Attorney

At The Kim Law Firm, LLC, our credit report error lawyer has the knowledge, skills, and professional expertise that consumers can trust. If you suffered tangible financial harm due to an error on your credit report, we are here to help you get it corrected and get the full available financial compensation. Call us today or contact us online to arrange your confidential initial case review. We handle credit report error cases under the FCRA nationwide. 

The post FCRA Amended By the Homebuyers Privacy Protection Act (What Consumers Need to Know) appeared first on The Kim Law Firm, LLC.

All borrowers who have federal student loans should take a look at their credit report. It is crucial that you ensure that the information being reported by lenders is accurate. Any mistakes could cause serious harm to your credit score. Here, our credit report error lawyer provides a more detailed overview of where federal student loan collections stand, why it is so important to make sure your credit report is accurate, and your options if there is an error. 

Where Federal Student Loan Collections Stand as of July 2025

If you are a student loan borrower with questions about how exactly the federal student loan collection system is operating, you are certainly not alone. The federal student loan system has been in flux since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020. There have been pauses in payments, attempts at reforms, ongoing litigation, and the gradual resumption of collection efforts. Even as we enter the Summer of 2025, there is still a lack of clarity on many key issues. Here is an overview of where federal student loan collections stand as of July 2025: 

• Reporting and Collection of Delinquent Federal Student Loans has Resumed: Federal student loan collections officially resumed in May of 2025. In doing so, the agency ended the multi‑year moratorium tied to the pandemic. As of June 2025, the Department of Education and the Treasury have restarted the Treasury Offset Program to reclaim defaulted balances via tax refund and Social Security offsets. Wage garnishments (up to 15% of a delinquent borrower’s disposable income) are set to begin later this summer. Notably, nearly 5 million borrowers are in default. TransUnion reports that 31% of borrowers are 90 (or more) days delinquent on their federal student loans. Reporting of student loan delinquencies has restarted as well. The restarting of federal collections has triggered credit score damage to more than 2.2 million people nationwide.  
• Many Student Loan Borrowers are Still in Forbearance (SAVE Plan Litigation): To be clear, there are currently many student loan borrowers who have no federal payments due. As of July 2025, millions of borrowers remain in forbearance because they are enrolled in the SAVE (Saving on a Valuable Education) repayment plan that was created by the Biden Administration. That repayment plan has not actually taken effect and almost certainly will not take effect. It is subject to ongoing litigation and is widely expected to be ruled illegal. Unlike collections against borrowers who are in default, these borrowers (SAVE enrolled) face no immediate garnishment. Instead, these borrowers are currently left in a state of limbo. If you are a borrower of federal student loans who is covered by the SAVE forbearance, you should carefully watch for any updates on when your payments will resume and under what specific terms. 
• GOP Lawmakers are Considering Major Reforms to Student Loan Repayment Plans: Republican lawmakers in both the House and Senate have proposed sweeping reforms. The proposed reforms have targeted repayment plans and federal borrowing limits. Key proposals include eliminating Grad PLUS and unsubsidized graduate loans, setting hard annual and lifetime caps ($20,500 per graduate year; $50,000 total for professional degrees), and limiting Parent PLUS borrowing. They also aim to consolidate multiple income-driven repayment plans into just two: a standard 10–25-year plan based on the principal borrowed, and a “Repayment Assistance Plan” or “RAP” tied to 1–10% of income, with a minimum payment of $10 and 30-year forgiveness. To be clear, it is still unclear if any of the GOP’s proposals for student loan reforms will become law. Changes could be made to the current proposal in the House bill and/or the Senate bill before they are passed. 

Student loan policies impact an enormous number of people and families. For reference, the Education Data Institute estimates that there are approximately 42.7 million Americans who have student loan debt. More than 15% of those borrowers are already in default as classified by the federal government. Many millions more are at serious risk of going into delinquency (and, potentially, default) in the coming months and years. 

As Reporting and Collection Resume, Serious Questions About Accuracy of Credit Reports

As federal student loan reporting and collections resume in 2025, borrowers are confronting serious issues with credit report accuracy. After years of paused payments and shifting policies, many servicers are now misreporting delinquency dates, payment statuses, or even incorrectly labeling accounts as in default. It is particularly concerning because inaccurate negative marks can drop credit scores by 100 points or more. Along with other things, that can adversely impact a person’s access to housing, car loans, favorable interest rates, and even jobs. An error on a person’s credit report is a big problem that requires immediate action. 

Consumer protection groups and credit bureaus report a spike in disputes, with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) warning that loan servicers may be violating the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). Here is another big part of the problem: Millions of borrowers are unaware of what is being reported about their loans at all. For that reason, it is highly recommended that all student loan borrowers closely monitor their credit reports from all three major bureaus (Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion). If you find problems, you should promptly file a dispute. You have the right to challenge errors. Any mistakes could have long-lasting financial consequences. 

The FCRA Protects Consumers Against Credit Report Errors (Student Loans Count)

The Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) is a very important consumer protection law. The FCRA provides much-needed protections to consumers facing credit report errors, including those related to federal student loans. Under the FCRA, credit reporting agencies and data furnishers, such as student loan servicers, are legally required to report accurate and complete information. If a borrower identifies an error, they have the right to dispute it. Some common examples of errors include a payment wrongly marked as late or a loan incorrectly listed in default. 

Once a dispute is filed, the credit bureau and the furnisher must investigate and correct any inaccuracies within 30 days. If they fail to do so, the consumer (student loan borrower) may be entitled to statutory damages and actual damages through legal action. With the resumption of federal student loan reporting in 2025, FCRA protections are more important than ever for those who have outstanding federal student loans. Borrowers should monitor their credit reports regularly and act quickly to challenge any mistakes that could unfairly damage their credit reports. 

Error Related to Student Loans on Your Credit Report? Know Your Rights and Options 

You pulled your credit report from the major credit reporting agencies, and you discovered that there is indeed a material error. If that error is causing any damage to your credit score, it is imperative that you take immediate action to correct it and protect your rights. The FCRA provides you with very important legal options. Here is an overview of key things to know about the law and what you need to do next: 

• You Have the Right to a Free Annual Credit Report: You are entitled to a free credit report from each of the three major credit bureaus (Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion) once every 12 months. That credit report can be obtained from AnnualCreditReport.com. Reviewing your credit report is the first step in catching student loan reporting errors and other issues. 
• You Have the Right to Dispute Inaccurate Information: Under the FCRA, you have the right to dispute any incorrect or outdated information. To be clear, that includes student loans that are misclassified as delinquent, in default, or that have the wrong balance. Once you file a dispute, the credit bureau must investigate and respond within 30 days.
• You Have the Right to an Accurate Investigation: Credit bureaus must conduct a “reasonable investigation” of your dispute. They are required to contact the student loan servicer (also known as the furnisher of the data) and verify the accuracy of the information. If the loan servicer fails to prove the information is correct, the credit bureau must remove/correct it. If they fail to do so, the credit bureau may bear liability. 
• You Have the Option to Dispute Errors Directly with a Loan Servicer: In addition to contacting the credit bureau, you can submit a written dispute directly to your loan servicer. Doing so is often a good strategy if you have supporting documents that demonstrate that there is an error on your credit file. That evidence may include payment records, approval of forbearance, or any relevant written communications. 
• You Have the Right to Sue for Damages: If inaccurate student loan information is not corrected and harms you financially, you may be able to file a lawsuit. The FCRA allows for statutory damages, actual damages, and in some cases, punitive damages. You may also recover attorney’s fees if the servicer or credit bureau acted willfully or negligently. Notably, you may be entitled to recover damages from the furnisher (lender, debt collector, etc), the credit reporting agency, or both. 
• You Have the Right to Add a Statement of Dispute: If a dispute does not resolve in your favor, you have the right to add a 100-word statement explaining the issue to your credit file. While this does not remove the negative mark, it gives future lenders or employers context when they review your report. That context can help when parties pull your credit report in the future.

Dealing with student loan credit errors can be deeply frustrating. It is normal to feel stressed out and overwhelmed. Here is the good news: You are not powerless. Know your rights, take prompt action, and do not hesitate to seek legal help if you are getting nowhere. Your credit score matters. Fixing errors now can protect your financial future. Our FCRA lawyer can help. 

How FCRA Attorney Richard H. Kim Can Help Student Loan Borrowers

An error on your credit report can cause you serious financial harm. If there is any type of inaccurate information about your student loans—whether it is a misstatement about how much you owe, false representations of missed payments, or other flaws—it is imperative that you take immediate action to correct the problem. The Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) requires both furnishers of information and credit reporting agencies to ensure that they review, investigate, and correct any errors in a timely manner. They can be held legally responsible for their failure to do so. 

Richard H. Kim is a credit report error lawyer with extensive experience handling FCRA cases. A strong, aggressive advocate for consumer rights, Attorney Kim has the knowledge and legal expertise to protect the rights of student loan borrowers who have had incorrect information cause damage to their credit score. Attorney Kim also handles debt collector harassment cases. If you are a student loan borrower with any questions about your rights or options under the FCRA or another state or federal law, we encourage you to contact our office for a confidential initial case review. 

Contact Our Credit Report Error Attorney Today

At The Kim Law Firm, LLC, our credit report error lawyer has the knowledge, skills, and legal experience that you can rely on. If you are a student loan borrower with any questions about an error on your credit report, we are here to help. Contact us for a completely confidential, no-obligation initial consultation. We represent consumers in credit report error cases nationwide. 

The post The Federal Government Has Resumed Collection Efforts on Delinquent Student Loans (Make Sure Your Credit Report is Accurate)  appeared first on The Kim Law Firm, LLC.

Lenders Must Provide Accurate and Timely Information

The FCRA requires that lenders, loan servicers, and third party debt collectors report credit information accurately. Unfortunately, some student loan servicers have struggled with the transition out of the pandemic-era repayment pause. There have been far too many errors on credit reports. If your credit score has dropped significantly due to a supposed delinquency that you believe is incorrect, it is important to act quickly. The first step is to contact your loan servicer to request clarification and, if necessary, a correction. If the servicer does not respond appropriately, you have the right to file a formal complaint. 

You Have the Right to Dispute Inaccurate Information on Your Credit Report

One of the most important protections under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) is your right to dispute inaccurate or unfair information on your credit report. If you believe your student loan servicer or credit bureau has reported incorrect details—such as a missed payment that you actually made or an account that does not belong to you—you can take action. Borrowers should request a free copy of their credit report from each of the three major credit bureaus (Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion) through AnnualCreditReport.com. If an error is found, the FCRA allows you to file a dispute with the credit bureau and the entity that reported the information. They are legally required to investigate your claim within 30 days and correct any inaccurate information. 

You Have the Right to Take Legal Action if Your Credit Rights Are Violated

If a credit bureau or student loan servicer fails to comply with the FCRA, you have the right to seek legal remedies. Along with other things, this includes the ability to recover damages for financial harm caused by an incorrect credit report. For instance, if a misreported delinquency leads to a denied mortgage application, a higher interest rate on a loan, or any other tangible financial harm, you may be entitled to compensation. 

Contact Our FCRA Attorney for a Confidential Consultation

At The Kim Law Firm, LLC, our credit report error lawyer has the knowledge and legal experience that you can trust. If you are a student loan borrower with questions about your rights under the FCRA, please do not hesitate to contact us today for a fully confidential consultation. We provide solutions-focused advocacy to clients. 

The post With Pandemic Era Student Loan Protections Fading, Borrowers Should Know their Rights Under the FCRA appeared first on The Kim Law Firm, LLC.

What is Experian?

Also referred to as a credit bureau, a credit reporting agency is a private company that collects, maintains, and sells information related to the credit history of individual consumers. Experian is one of the nation’s three major credit reporting agencies (Equifax and TransUnion). Notably, these companies must comply with federal and state law. 

Allegations: Experian Failed to Conduct Proper Investigations

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has filed a consumer protection lawsuit against Experian. The federal agency alleges that the credit bureau failed to properly investigate consumer disputes. As a direct consequence of the “sham” investigations alleged by the CFPB many consumers had incorrect adverse information on their credit reports. The CFPB alleges violations of the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). Among other things, the agency accuses Experian of: 

• Systematically conducting inadequate investigations into consumer complaints; 
• Frequently disregarding key details provided by consumers; and 
• Blindly accepting responses from furnishers (creditors, debt collectors, etc). 

The lawsuit also contends Experian will often improperly reinsert previously deleted inaccurate information into consumer credit reports. As a result, there can be considerable confusion, and the affected consumers can be directly harmed as incorrect adverse information can undermine a person’s ability to access credit, get a fair interest rate, obtain housing, and even get a job. As part of the lawsuit, the CFPB is seeking to stop the violations, require Experian to ensure compliance with the FCRA and recover financial compensation for affected consumers. 

The FCRA Protects Consumers from Credit Report Errors

Credit reporting agencies must comply with the FCRA. The law helps to protect consumers against harm caused by credit report errors. It requires credit reporting agencies like Experian to ensure the accuracy of consumer information and to properly investigate disputes. Consumers have the right to challenge incorrect data and receive a fair review. The FCRA also prevents previously removed inaccurate information from being reinserted without proper verification. Notably, consumers can file an FCRA lawsuit on their own and do not have to wait for the CFPB or any other government entity to take action. An experienced credit report error lawyer can help. 

We Help Consumers Fight Back Against Credit Report Errors

At The Kim Law Firm, LLC, our consumer protection attorney has the experience you can rely on. If you suffered financial harm due to an error on your credit report, our team is here to help. Contact us today for a free, no-obligation initial consultation. We are committed to helping consumers hold credit reporting agencies accountable for errors that should have been corrected. 

The post CFPB Files Lawsuit Against Experian for “Sham” Investigation Into Credit Report Errors appeared first on The Kim Law Firm, LLC.