In July of 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit made an important ruling in a Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) case arising out of Alabama. In Nelson v. Experian, the court found that a consumer must prove that they have suffered some actual, tangible financial harm that was not “self-inflicted” in order to have standing to file a lawsuit under the FCRA. The decision effectively narrows the interpretation of standing in that circuit. Here, our credit report error lawyer provides an overview of this case, the implications of the decisions, and what you should do if there is a mistake on your credit report. 

FCRA Case Review: Nelson v. Experian

The Facts

Jessica Nelson is a resident of Alabama. A few years ago, she requested a copy of her Experian credit report. When she reviewed what she received from the credit reporting bureau, she found four errors in the informational (header) section. The mistakes (which are uncontested as being mistakes in this legal case) were as follows: 

• A misspelling of her maiden name; 
• A wrong address for her mother; 
• A wrong address for her attorney; and 
• An incorrect variation of her Social Security number. 

She sent dispute letters to Experian asking that the items be corrected. Notably, she did not allege that Experian ever furnished the erroneous header information to any third party or that her credit score fell, that she was denied credit, or that she suffered emotional distress. However, the information was not corrected in a timely manner, and Mr. Nelson sued the credit reporting agency in a state court under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). 

In her legal complaint, she alleged that the company violated FCRA § 1681i. That is the reinvestigation provision in the statute. Specifically, she argued that Experian failed to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation. Experian removed the case to federal court and later moved to dismiss it on standing grounds. Experian moved to dismiss. It held that Ms. Nelson had standing based on her out-of-pocket costs for certified mail and the time she spent trying to correct the errors. The case was appealed and eventually reached the Eleventh Circuit court. 

The Legal Issue

The primary issue in this case was whether or not the plaintiff (Ms. Nelson) had standing to sue for an FCRA violation. Article III standing requires a concrete injury that is actual or imminent and fairly traceable to the defendant. There were no allegations that Experian disclosed the inaccurate information. However, Ms. Nelson raised two theories of concrete injury in order to meet the standing requirement in order to bring an FCRA claim: 

• Injury One: The time and money she spent correcting Experian’s internal errors. 
• Injury Two: An increased risk of identity theft due to the erroneous personal identifiers.

On review, the panel framed the determinative question as whether either theory constitutes a “concrete” injury under Spokeo and TransUnion when the inaccuracies never left Experian’s internal file. The court examined its own precedents that plaintiffs had cited and asked whether those cases recognized standing based on “self-inflicted” mitigation costs alone, absent third-party dissemination or other real-world effects. The court also considered the Supreme Court’s guidance in other cases that addressed standing. 

Legal Background: Standing is a constitutional requirement under Article III that ensures federal courts only decide actual “cases or controversies.” To establish standing, a plaintiff must show three elements: (1) an injury-in-fact that is concrete and particularized, (2) that the injury is fairly traceable to the defendant’s conduct, and (3) that the injury is likely to be redressed by a favorable court decision. Without standing, the court lacks jurisdiction to hear the case. That means it can be dismissed outright without a hearing on the actual merits. 

The Decision

On review, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit ruled in favor of the credit reporting agency and against the consumer. The Eleventh Circuit vacated and remanded for lack of Article III standing. 

To start, the court held that Ms. Nelson’s expenditure of time and money to correct errors in Experian’s internal file was a “self-imposed” cost that cannot “manufacture standing”. As the court stated in its decision, a plaintiff cannot “spend [her] way into standing” by choosing to incur mitigation costs when the underlying inaccuracy caused no concrete harm. The court emphasized that Ms. Nelson alleged no third-party dissemination, no score drop, no credit denial, and no emotional or psychological injury. Because the underlying errors did not themselves inflict real-world harm, the associated time and postage were not injuries in fact under the law. 

Beyond that, the court rejected Nelson’s “increased risk of identity theft” theory as too speculative. To rely on future harm, the risk must be “certainly impending” or present a “substantial risk,” supported by evidence at summary judgment. Nelson’s chain of events (that Experian might furnish the incorrect identifiers, which might prompt offers to be mailed to the wrong addresses, which a bad actor might intercept) was deemed a “speculative chain of possibilities” that is insufficient to establish legal standing in the eyes of the court. 

What are the Implications of the Eleventh Circuit’s Ruling in Nelson v. Experian?

This is an important case to be aware of. Unfortunately, the Eleventh Circuit’s decision in Nelson v. Experian makes it harder for consumers in Alabama, Florida, and Georgia (the three states covered by this court) to sue a credit bureau under the Fair Credit Reporting Act unless they can show real, tangible harm. Simply finding mistakes in your personal information (like a misspelled name, wrong address, or incorrect Social Security number) will not be enough by itself. To move forward with a case, you must show that the error caused actual damage, such as denial of credit, a lower score, emotional distress, or a financial loss. The court also rejected the idea that the time or money spent trying to fix the mistake counts as harm that is sufficient to establish legal standing. 

For consumers who live outside the Eleventh Circuit, the ruling is not automatically binding. That means for people who live in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and the other 45 states outside of the Eleventh Circuit, the decision creates no binding precedent. With that being said, it could still influence how other courts handle similar cases. Different federal appeals courts sometimes disagree. For that reason, the United States Supreme Court could eventually be called on to step in to resolve the conflict. Until then, whether you can sue a credit bureau without proving direct harm will depend on where you live. If you are dealing with errors on your credit report, it is always best to act quickly, keep detailed records, and consult with a consumer rights attorney as soon as possible. 

Know the Steps You Should Take if There is an Error on Your Credit Report

While the scope of “standing” for FCRA claims has been narrowed somewhat in the Eleventh Circuit, the right to take action to hold credit reporting agencies or a furnisher of information accountable for a material error that causes you damages is still as strong as ever. If you were the victim of a grave mistake on your credit report, you can and should take action to get justice and compensation. Here are five big steps to take to deal with an error on your credit report: 

• Get a Copy of All Credit Reports and Confirm the Error: The first step is to make sure you know exactly what’s on your credit reports. You are entitled to one free report per year from each of the three major credit reporting agencies (Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion) through AnnualCreditReport.com. When you get a copy, you should review the report carefully and confirm whether the mistake appears across multiple reports or only one. Be sure to look at every section, including your personal information, credit accounts, and public records. Catching an error early is important because it allows you to track whether it is isolated or widespread. A proactive approach is always best. 
• Notify Credit Reporting Agencies of the Error: Once you confirm a mistake, you need to alert the credit reporting agency directly. Send a written dispute letter that clearly explains what is wrong and why it should be corrected. You should include copies of documents that back up your claim, such as bills, account statements, or identification records. Always keep copies of everything you send, and consider mailing your dispute via certified mail so you have proof it was received.
• Document Any Damages You Suffered Due to the Mistake: As this case demonstrates well, actual damages are a key part of an FCRA claim. To the extent that you have already suffered any adverse consequences related to the error, you should be sure that they are well-documented. Some examples include being denied a loan, receiving a higher interest rate, or facing embarrassment when a potential employer saw an inaccurate report. You should keep letters of denial, emails, or financial statements that show the consequences of the error. You should also track the out-of-pocket costs you have spent to try to fix the problem.
• Wait for the Results of the Investigation: After receiving your dispute, the credit reporting agency must investigate, usually within 30 days. During this time, the agency contacts the furnisher of the information to confirm whether the data is correct. At the end of the process, the agency will send you the results in writing, along with a free copy of your updated credit report if changes were made. It is important to review their response carefully. If the error is corrected, your problem may be resolved. If not, you will need to consider additional steps to protect your rights.
• Consult With an FCRA Attorney and Prepare to Take Legal Action: If the error remains after the investigation, or if the agency refuses to correct it despite clear proof, it may be time to speak with an attorney who specializes in Fair Credit Reporting Act cases. An experienced lawyer can review your situation, explain whether you have standing to sue in your jurisdiction, and help you gather the evidence needed for a claim. A credit report error attorney with experience handling FCRA cases can review your claim, answer your questions, and escalate the matter to the appropriate level. 

How Credit Report Error Attorney Richard H. Kim Can Help

Dealing with an error on your credit report can be stressful, frustrating, and overwhelming at times. It is normal to feel like you have been taken advantage of by a lender, credit, debt collector, and/or credit reporting agency. The FCRA is a key legal tool that allows you to get the problem fixed, hold the responsible party or parties accountable, and seek financial compensation for any damages that you suffered. A proactive approach is the key to getting justice and financial relief. 

Richard H. Kim is a top-rated consumer protection lawyer with extensive experience handling credit report error cases, including FCRA liability. If you were the victim of any type of credit reporting mistake, Attorney Kim is prepared to review your case, answer your questions, explain your options, and develop a plan of action to help you seek justice and the absolute maximum financial compensation. An initial consultation with our FCRA lawyer is confidential and without obligation. 

Contact Our Credit Report Error Lawyer for Immediate Help

At The Kim Law Firm, LLC, our credit report error attorney has the professional knowledge that consumers can rely on. If there is an error on your credit report that has caused you any type of adverse financial impact, you have the right to take action to get it corrected and to recover compensation for your damages. Our legal team is here to help you navigate each and every aspect of the legal claims process. Do not go it alone. Contact us today or online to arrange a complimentary, no-obligation initial consultation. We represent consumers in credit report error cases nationwide.