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.

The FCRA also applies to data furnishers, including banks, credit card companies, and third-party debt collectors. They all have a duty to ensure that the consumer information they report to credit bureaus is accurate and up-to-date. At The Kim Law Firm, LLC, we handle the full range of FCRA claims. Our team wants to make sure that you understand your rights. Here, our credit report error lawyer provides answers to the most frequently asked questions (FAQs) about data furnishers and the FCRA. 

Your Frequently Asked Questions About Data Furnishers and the FCRA Answered

What is the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA)?

It is the most important law for credit reports. The FCRA is a comprehensive federal law that protects consumers. The goal is to ensure fairness, accuracy, and privacy in credit reporting. Along with other things, the FCRA regulates how credit information is collected, shared, and corrected. It also gives consumers the right to dispute inaccurate or incomplete information. 

What is a Data Furnisher?

Data furnishers are covered by the FCRA. Broadly defined, a data furnisher is any entity that provides consumer information to credit reporting agencies. These businesses report payment history, account status, and other credit data that influence your credit score. Some of the most common examples of data furnishers include: 

• Banks: It is not uncommon for commercial banks to report information about checking, savings, and loan account performance, overdrafts, and missed payments.
• Credit Card Companies: Credit card companies are data furnishers. Most credit card companies report consumer information to the three major credit bureaus on a monthly basis. Along with other things, they share monthly account balances, credit limits, and payment history for open and closed accounts.
• Other Lenders: Other lenders are also classified as data furnishers for the purposes of the FCRA. They may provide updated status about things like mortgages, auto loans, and student loans.
• Debt Collectors: Finally, third-party debt collectors are also data furnishers if they opt to report any information to any of the three credit reporting agencies. It does not matter that these entities did not make the original loan. Data collectors may report information about a delinquent account, defaults, payments and settlements, and resolutions. 

Are Credit Reporting Agencies Data Furnishers under the FCRA?

No. Credit reporting agencies are not data furnishers. They are still covered by the FCRA, but they are separate entities. Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion are not considered data furnishers because they collect and compile credit data from furnishers. They do not typically provide information themselves. Still, they have legal obligations under the FCRA to ensure accuracy of the information being reported and to handle consumer disputes in the proper manner.

What are the Three Main Obligations of Data Furnishers Under the FCRA?

Data furnishers are required to comply with all applicable FCRA rules. Under federal law (16 CFR Part 660), these entities must meet the following specific duties to promote fair credit reporting: 

1. Provide Accurate Information: As a starting point, the foundation of FCRA protections is a consumer’s right to have only accurate information on their credit report. With that in mind, data furnishers must ensure that all information they report to credit reporting agencies is complete and correct. Along with other things, it includes account balances, payment history, and account status. They cannot knowingly or negligently report false or outdated data. 
2. Investigate Complaints: The reality is that nothing is perfect. The FCRA acknowledges that errors can happen on credit reports, including because of good-faith mistakes. The FCRA also grants consumers the right to raise a complaint. When a consumer disputes information appearing on their credit report, the furnisher must conduct a reasonable investigation. They are required to review relevant account records and respond promptly to the credit reporting agency that notified them of the dispute.
3. Correct Errors in a Timely Manner: Finally, the FCRA requires data furnishers to correct any credit report errors that they are responsible for in a timely manner. If an error or inaccuracy is found, the furnisher must update or delete the incorrect data quickly. They must also report the correction to all credit reporting agencies that received the inaccurate information. Failure to correct errors within a reasonable period (usually 30 days) can result in legal liability under the FCRA. 

Can I Sue a Data Furnisher for an FCRA Violation?

Yes, absolutely. The FCRA includes a private right of action. In other words, you have the right to file a lawsuit against a data furnisher that violates your rights under federal law. Some of the most common FCRA violations by data furnishers include: 

• Failing to investigate a valid dispute; 
• Reporting false information; and
• Refusing to correct known errors. 

What Evidence Do I Need to Hold a Data Furnisher Liable for a Credit Report Error?

It depends. You need documentation that proves the data reported was inaccurate and that the furnisher failed to fix it after being notified. Strong evidence includes things like: 

• Account statements; 
• Correspondence with the furnisher; 
• Dispute letters; and 
• Credit reports showing the ongoing error.

Notably, it helps to keep written proof that you submitted a dispute through a credit reporting agency. If the furnisher ignored or mishandled your dispute, this strengthens your case. Remember, a credit report error claim under the FCRA largely depends on showing that the furnisher’s conduct was unreasonable or willful. 

What is the Role of “Notice of Dispute” Under the FCRA?

A big one for data furnisher furnishers. Under 15 U.S.C. §1681s-2(a)(3), a data furnisher must include a “notice of dispute” when reporting information that a consumer has formally challenged. While the investigation is ongoing, the furnisher cannot continue to report the data as fully verified or undisputed. The notation alerts credit reporting agencies that the accuracy of the information is under review. Failure to include this notice can mislead potential creditors and violate both the accuracy and fairness provisions of the FCRA. You may have a claim for noncompliance. 

What Damages Can I Recover in an FCRA Claim?

Consumers can recover actual damages, statutory damages, and attorney’s fees. In cases of willful noncompliance, punitive damages may also be available. Notably, you can recover statutory damages of $100 to $1,000 for willful violations even without proving financial loss. 

To succeed, you must first dispute the inaccuracy with the credit reporting agency and give the furnisher a chance to correct it. If they fail to act, you should pursue your remedies. A top credit report error lawyer can help you determine the remedies that are available in your specific case. 

Can a Data Furnisher Report Information Without My Permission? 

Yes. Data furnishers do not need your permission to report information to the big three credit bureaus. Indeed, they do not necessarily need to give you express notice that they are reporting anything each time that they do it. With that being said, they can only report information with strict legal limits. When you open a credit account, loan, or line of credit, you typically authorize the lender to share information with credit bureaus as part of your contract. That means they can report payment history, balances, or delinquencies without asking again each time. However, they cannot share personal or financial details unrelated to the account. If a company reports information you never authorized (especially if you never opened an account), you may be dealing with identity theft or another issue. You can dispute the entry and request a fraud alert or credit freeze. A credit report error attorney can help. 

What is a “Reasonable Investigation” Under the FCRA?

When a consumer brings a complaint (raises a dispute), the FCRA requires data furnishers to conduct a proper investigation. The term that is used is “reasonable investigation.” Under federal law, it is defined as the furnisher making a genuine, good-faith effort to verify the accuracy of disputed information. Along with other things, this requires reviewing all relevant account records, correspondence, and supporting documentation. To be clear, the investigation must go beyond automated verification or superficial checks. 

Note: The data furnisher must respond within 30 days unless the consumer provides additional information that extends the timeframe. If the furnisher cannot confirm the accuracy, it must delete or correct the entry across all reporting agencies. In other words, once a complaint is raised by a consumer, a data furnisher must confirm the accuracy of what it reported. If it cannot do so, it must be removed. The burden of “proof” is on the data furnisher, not the consumer. 

Does State Law Matter for the FCRA and Data Furnishers?

Yes. The FCRA sets national standards. With that being said, it does not completely override state law. Some states have additional consumer protection statutes that expand your rights or increase penalties for inaccurate reporting. For example, California and New York impose stricter requirements on furnishers and credit reporting agencies. However, states cannot create conflicting obligations that make compliance with the FCRA impossible. When both laws apply, the consumer generally benefits from whichever rule provides stronger protection. 

Should I Review My Credit Reports on a Regular Basis?

Yes. Data furnishers must comply with the FCRA. With that being said, they do not all do so. For that reason, you should review your credit reports at least once a year. It is best to check the report from each of the major credit bureaus. You can request a free copy from each major credit bureau (Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion) every 12 months through AnnualCreditReport.com. Notably, many consumers check one bureau every four months to monitor throughout the year. If you plan to apply for a loan or mortgage, you should review all reports in advance to correct any issues.

When I Close an Account, Does a Data Furnisher Have to Remove All Negative Information?

No. That is not a requirement of the FCRA. Indeed, closing an account does not erase negative history already reported to credit bureaus. Late payments, charge-offs, or defaults remain for up to seven years. However, once the account is closed and paid, it will eventually be marked as “closed in good standing” after the reporting period ends. A data furnisher has not violated the law as long as it reports accurate, up-to-date information. 

Why Trust Our FCRA Lawyer for a Claim Against a Data Furnisher 

Consumers have important legal rights under the FCRA. If your rights under the law were violated by a data furnisher (credit card company, debt collector, etc), it is imperative that you know how to protect your financial interests. An error on your credit report can cause you serious harm. Richard H. Kim is a consumer rights advocate with extensive experience taking on challenging FCRA cases. Attorney Kim holds data furnishers accountable for violations of federal law. We are proactive, and we invest time and resources into each and every case that we take on. Your initial consultation with our top-rated credit report error lawyer is fully confidential and without any additional obligations. 

Speak to Our Credit Report Error Attorney Today

At The Kim Law Firm, LLC, our credit report error lawyer is standing by, ready to protect your rights and your interests. If you have any questions about bringing a claim against a data furnisher, we are here as a legal resource. Call us today or contact us online for your completely confidential, no obligation initial consultation. We handle FCRA claims for consumers nationwide. It is our mission to fight for justice and the best possible outcome for clients. 

The post Claims Against Data Furnishers and the FCRA: Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) appeared first on The Kim Law Firm, LLC.

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. 

The post Eleventh Circuit Narrows Standing to Claim Credit Report Error Under FCRA  appeared first on The Kim Law Firm, LLC.

Debt collection agencies have legal responsibilities under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). They must report accurate information to credit bureaus. If they are notified of an error by a consumer, they must correct it. They can be held liable for their failure to do so. Here, our credit report error attorney provides a guide to hold debt collectors accountable for FCRA violations. 

Know the Law: Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA)

First and foremost, it is useful for consumers to have a broad understanding of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). The FCRA is a federal consumer protection law that is designed to ensure that people are not harmed by errors on their credit reports. Here is the key point to know: 

• The FCRA gives you the right to dispute inaccurate, incomplete, or outdated information on your credit report. 

Notably, the law also requires credit reporting agencies and information furnishers—including both original creditors/lenders and third-party debt collectors—to ensure the accuracy of the data they provide. The FCRA contains a private right of action. That means that if your rights are violated, you can file a lawsuit to seek damages. 

What is a Debt Collector?

A debt collector is distinguished from a creditor/lender. A debt collector is any person or company that regularly collects debts on behalf of others. In other words, they are not the party that made the original loan. Along with other entities, this includes third-party collection agencies, law firms that collect debts, or companies that buy delinquent debts and then try to collect them. Debt collectors are regulated by a federal law called the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) as well as state-based regulations. 

Note: A debt collector may or may not “own” the alleged debt that resulted in inaccurate information on your credit report. Indeed, sometimes they own it and sometimes they do not. It depends on how the debt collector came to be involved in the matter. Some debt collection agencies purchase alleged delinquent accounts from original creditors for pennies on the dollar and then attempt to collect on them. Other third-party debt collectors do not own the debt—they are hired by the original creditor (like a bank or credit card company) to collect the amount owed. 

The FCRA Covers Debt Collectors (Furnishers)

Debt collectors are classified as “furnishers” of information for the purposes of the FCRA. Notably, they are covered by the law if they report any information to any of the three major credit bureaus (Experian, TransUnion, and Equifax). They have a legal obligation to provide accurate and complete information about accounts they report. If a debt collector submits any form of inaccurate information about you to a credit reporting agency, you have the right to challenge it and seek a correction of the error. Indeed, the FCRA requires furnishers—including debt collectors—to investigate your claim in a timely manner and to correct any errors. The failure to do so can result in legal liability. Consumers may be entitled to both statutory damages and actual damages. 

An Overview of the Most Common Errors Made By Debt Collectors

Mistakes by debt collectors can come in a wide range of different forms. Consumers should carefully review their credit report—and it is best to check with each of the three credit agencies—for any mistakes. Some of the most common errors made by debt collectors include: 

• The Reporting of Inaccurate Information Related to an Account: In some cases, debt collectors report the wrong details—such as an incorrect balance, payment status, or even account number—to credit bureaus. It is a big problem because it can result in serious damage to a consumer’s credit score if the mistake is adverse. 
• The Failure to Update an Account that has Been Resolved: Once a debt has been paid in full or resolved through a settlement, a debt collector must report the updated status to credit bureaus. If they continue to report the account as delinquent, it misrepresents your financial history. Outdated reporting can unfairly lower your credit score. 
• The Re-Aging Old Debts (An Illegal Practice): Some debt collectors attempt to “re-age” a debt by changing the original delinquency date in order to make it appear newer than it is. It is an unethical tactic and an illegal practice meant to keep a negative item on your credit report longer than the FCRA allows. The age of the account must be accurate. 
• The Failure to Properly Investigate a Dispute: When you dispute any information related to a debt on your credit report with a debt collector, the FCRA requires that the entity (furnisher) conduct a reasonable investigation. An investigation should be both timely and comprehensive. Unfortunately, some debt collectors ignore disputes or fail to verify the accuracy of the information they have reported. 

What to Do If a Debt Collector Made an Error On Your Credit Report

Imagine that you have discovered inaccurate information on your credit report. A debt collection agency is the source of the error. It is important to take immediate action in order to assert your rights under the FCRA. Here are four key steps to take: 

1. Document It: Evidence is key to any FCRA claim. With that in mind, you should start by gathering all documentation related to the error, from copies of all your credit reports from all three agencies, to payment records, and any correspondence with the debt collector. You should also take screenshots or print copies of how the incorrect information appears on your credit file. The more details you have, the better positioned you will be to get justice. 
2. Notify Them: The FCRA empowers consumers to take action to compel a debt collector to correct erroneous information. As a general rule, you should send a written notice to the debt collector explaining the error and requesting correction. Be clear, concise, and include any supporting documentation that proves their reporting is inaccurate. The best approach is to work with an experienced credit report error attorney. When you give notice, that puts the debt collector on the clock to investigate the matter. 
3. Dispute It: Beyond notifying the debt collector, you can also dispute errors directly with all three of the major credit reporting agencies. As part of that formal dispute, you will generally want to include a written explanation and copies of relevant documentation. Notably, the FCRA also requires the credit agencies to investigate within 30 days. If the debt collector fails to verify the debt or update the information, the error must be removed. 
4. Follow Up: After the 30-day window, check your credit report to see if the issue was resolved. If the incorrect information remains, you may have the right to sue the debt collector for violating the FCRA. In some cases, the credit bureau may also bear liability for its failures. Do not go it alone: A top-tier consumer protection attorney can help you determine the best course of action to get your credit report corrected and to hold a debt collection agency accountable for violating your FCRA rights. 

Debt Collector Liability Under the FCRA: Inaccurate Information and Failure to Correct 

When is a debt collector legally responsible for violating the FCRA? As a general rule, there are two key elements that must be satisfied in order to bring a successful FCRA claim for compensation against a debt collector: 

1. An error was made, meaning the debt collectorwas reporting inaccurate information; and
2. After being notified, the debt collector failed to correct that incorrect information. 

That a debt collector made a mistake is not necessarily sufficient for a consumer to recover damages under the FCRA. The law requires you to provide proper notice of the error. Once that dispute is filed, the debt collector—acting as a furnisher—must conduct a reasonable investigation and correct or delete any inaccurate information. 

Understanding Your Remedies for FCRA Violations By a Debt Collector 

As noted previously, the FCRA includes a private right of action. That means that the law allows consumers to file a civil lawsuit against any party that violated their rights under the law. They do not have to wait for a regulator to take action. Here is an overview of the remedies that may be available to you if your FCRA rights were violated by a debt collector: 

• Actual Damages: To start, consumers have the right to seek compensation for real financial harm caused by the FCRA violation—such as denied credit, a rejected loan, or increased interest rates. You should carefully document your damages. 
• Statutory Damages: Notably, even without proving actual harm, consumers may recover $100 to $1,000 per violation for willful noncompliance with the FCRA. To qualify for statutory damages under the law, you must prove a wilful violation. 
• Attorneys’ Fees and Court Costs: If you win your case, the furnisher (debt collector) or credit bureau that violated your FCRA rights may also be required to pay your reasonable legal fees and litigation costs.

You May Also Have a Claim Under the FDCPA

The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) is a federal law that regulates debt collectors. If a debt collector has reported inaccurate information to a credit bureau, your rights may be violated under not only the FCRA but also the FDCPA. The FDCPA prohibits debt collectors from using deceptive, unfair, or abusive practices when attempting to collect a debt. Misrepresenting the status of a debt—such as claiming it is still owed when it has been paid or settled—can qualify as a violation. If the false reporting is part of a broader pattern of harassment or misrepresentations, that could further strengthen your ability to hold a debt collector liable under the FDCPA. 

While the FCRA focuses on the accuracy of information provided to credit reporting agencies, the FDCPA governs the conduct of debt collectors directly. In other words, if a debt collection agency uses credit reporting as a way to pressure or mislead you into paying a debt, you may have two distinct legal claims. Both laws provide for damages, attorney’s fees, and potential statutory penalties. If you have any specific questions about your rights and your options under the FDCPA, our debt collector harassment attorney can help. 

How Consumer Protection Lawyer Richard H. Kim Can Help

Unfortunately, debt collectors can be very difficult to work with. Through carelessness, negligence, or even intentional misconduct, they could report inaccurate information about a debt that you (allegedly) owe to the three major credit reporting bureaus. Worse yet, when you notify them of the problem, they may not take appropriate action to correct it. You do not have to take on debt collectors alone. Richard H. Kim is a consumer protection attorney with deep experience handling FCRA cases. Our team is well-equipped to advocate for justice for consumers who have been the victims of unfair practices. Among other things, our credit report error lawyer is prepared to: 

• Conduct a comprehensive, confidential review and evaluation of your case; 
• Investigate the credit report error—helping you gather relevant evidence; 
• Take action to ensure that your credit report is corrected; 
• Hold the debt collector accountable for violating the FCRA; and
• Help you understand your options under other laws, including the FDCPA. 

Contact Our Credit Report Error Attorney Today

At The Kim Law Firm, LLC, our consumer protection lawyer represents clients with compassion, integrity, and drive to find the most effective solution. Debt collectors must be held accountable for errors. If your credit report has inaccurate information because of a debt collection agency, we are here to help. Contact us today for a fully confidential, no-obligation consultation.

The post Did a Debt Collector Put Something Inaccurate on Your Credit Report? A Comprehensive Guide to Your Rights Under the FCRA appeared first on The Kim Law Firm, LLC.

Mortgage Companies Must Comply With FCRA

Under the FCRA, all businesses that furnish information to credit agencies must ensure the accuracy of that data. To be clear, this includes mortgage companies—both the original lender and any loan servicer. Whether you took out your loan from a national bank or your loan is currently serviced by a third-party mortgage company, these firms are covered by the FCRA. Furnishers of credit data are required to report accurate information and to update or correct information if they discover errors. They must also respond to disputes in a timely, reasonable manner. 

You Can Sue a Mortgage Lender or Servicer for an FCRA Violation

You can sue a mortgage company—including the loan originator or the loan servicer—if they violate your rights under the FCRA. Importantly, liability under the FCRA may apply to the company that initially issued your mortgage, any company that later acquired your loan, or a servicing company that manages your payments and account. Some common FCRA violations include: 

• Reporting Inaccurate Information: A mortgage company may report that your loan is late, in default, or delinquent—even when your payments are current. 
• Failing to Correct Errors: Once you file a dispute, the mortgage company is legally obligated to investigate and fix any verified mistakes. 
• Continuing to Report Outdated Data after Loan Modification:  Your credit report must reflect the current status of your mortgage, including discharges from bankruptcy or approved loan modifications. 
• Failing to Conduct a Reasonable Investigation into a Dispute: The FCRA requires mortgage companies to thoroughly investigate disputes submitted through credit bureaus. If the investigation is rushed, superficial, or entirely overlooked, that could be a violation

Your Remedies for a Mortgage-Related Credit Report Error

If your mortgage lender or servicer violates the FCRA and causes harm—such as credit denial, higher interest rates, emotional distress, or other financial losses—you may be entitled to compensation. Remedies under the FCRA can include:

• Actual Damages: Actual damages, out-of-pocket losses, missed credit opportunities, and emotional distress caused by inaccurate credit reporting.
• Statutory Damages: If the violation was willful, you may recover between $100 and $1,000—even if you can’t prove actual damages.
• Attorneys’ Fees and Costs: If you prevail, the FCRA allows for the recovery of legal fees and court costs.

Contact Our Credit Report Error Attorney Today

At The Kim Law Firm, LLC, we are committed to protecting the rights and the interests of consumers. If you have any questions about suing a mortgage lender or mortgage service for a credit report error, we are here to help. Contact us today for a fully confidential, no obligation initial consultation. We have extensive experience handling FCRA cases. 

The post Can You Sue a Mortgage Company for a FCRA Violation? 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.

What is on your credit report is important. The information can impact your ability to get approved for a mortgage, your interest rates, and many other aspects of life. The Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) is a federal law that regulates how consumer credit information is collected, shared, and used. Under the FCRA, consumers can sue: 

1. Credit reporting agencies; and
2. Furnishers of information.  

The category of “furnishers of information” includes both the original creditor and any third-party debt collectors. You have the right to sue a debt collection agency for violating your FCRA rights. Here, our consumer protection attorney discusses the most notable points to understand about holding a debt collector legally responsible for an FCRA violation. 

An Overview of Your Rights Under the FCRA

Under the FCRA, consumers have the right to access their credit reports, dispute any inaccuracies, and expect fair treatment from companies that handle financial data. Debt collectors who report incorrect information to credit bureaus must investigate disputes and correct errors. They cannot knowingly report false or outdated debt. If a debt collector violates these rules—such as failing to correct inaccurate information—a consumer can hold them accountable. 

Third-Party Debt Collectors May Be Held Liable for FCRA Violations

Creditors and third-party debt collectors are furnishers of information. The FCRA applies to them, and they can also be held liable for violations of the law. Indeed, if a debt collector furnishes false information to a credit bureau and fails to correct it after a dispute, they may be in violation of federal consumer rights law. A consumer can sue a debt collection agency for an FCRA breach. 

Remedies for Consumers Who an FCRA Claim Against a Debt Collector 

If a debt collection agency violates your rights under the FCRA, you may be entitled to several remedies. You can file a dispute with the credit bureau to correct inaccuracies and report the debt collector to regulatory agencies like the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). If the violation caused financial harm, you can file a civil lawsuit seeking compensation for damages. Consumers have a right to seek financial compensation for the full value of their actual damages. 

You May Have a Claim Against a Debt Collector Under an Alternative Law (FDCPA)

Beyond any FCRA claim, a consumer who has been subject to unfair treatment by a debt collection agency may also have an additional claim under the Fair Debt Collections Practice Act (FDCPA). The FDCPA is a federal law that protects people against debt collection harassment. If you have any questions about an FDCPA claim, an experienced attorney can help. 

Contact Our Consumer Protection Attorney Today

At The Kim Law Firm, LLC, our consumer protection lawyer has the knowledge, experience, and integrity that you can trust. If you have any questions about bringing a claim against a third party debt collector under the FCRA, we are here as a legal resource. Contact us today for a free, completely confidential initial consultation. We are committed to protecting the rights of consumers against unfair actions by debt collectors and credit reporting agencies.

The post Can You Sue a Debt Collection Agency for Violating Your Rights Under the FCRA? appeared first on The Kim Law Firm, LLC.