CRAs Must Use Reliable Sources...Furnishers?

Maximum Possible Accuracy
David A. Szwak

CRAs Must Use Reliable Sources...Furnishers?

Postby David A. Szwak » Wed Oct 26, 2005 6:43 pm

CRA's MUST USE RELIABLE SOURCES AND VERIFY FACTUAL STATEMENTS IN ITS GOOD FAITH, IMPARTIAL INVESTIGATION:

Consumer reporting agency failed to employ reasonable procedures to ensure the maximum possible accuracy of data it collected for subscriber where it spent only 30 minutes to prepare report, report was rife with innuendo, misstatement and libel, only used one informant who was biased, made no verification of the report and reinvestigation of report evidenced that every allegation in report was false. Millstone v. O'Hanlon Reports, Inc., 383 F.Supp. 269 (U.S.D.C. E.D. Mo. 1974), affirmed, 528 F.2d 829 (8th Cir. 1976)[Mo.].

David A. Szwak

Postby David A. Szwak » Mon Dec 05, 2005 7:23 pm

Atkinson v. Stop-N-Go Foods, Inc.,
83 Ohio App.3d 132, 614 N.E.2d 784, Ohio App. 2 Dist., Oct 08, 1992

... truth, and remained within the scope of the qualified privilege. Atkinson relies upon the following language in Bartels v. Retail Credit Co. (1970), 185 Neb. 304, 309, 175 N.W.2d 292, 296, 40 A.L.R.3d 1039, 1046-1047, which we quoted in Patio World ..... the effect the report will have upon the rights of the subject of the report. To be privileged, a mercantile agency's representatives must act impartially and in good faith, carefully evaluating all information before disseminating any defamatory statements to its subscribers. ...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Patio World v. Better Business Bureau, Inc.,
43 Ohio App.3d 6, 538 N.E.2d 1098, Ohio App. 2 Dist., Jan 20, 1989

... published with reckless disregard as to truth of statements made to members of the public, precluding summary judgment. [6] 108A Credit Reporting Agencies 108Ak3 k. Liability for False Information. Better Business Bureau must exercise all reasonable care to ascertain accuracy of ..... the public. [6] We agree with the remarks of Justice Spencer of the Nebraska Supreme Court in Bartels v. Retail Credit Co. (1970), 185 Neb. 304, 309, 175 N.W.2d 292, 296, 40 A.L.R.3d 1039, 1046-1047, wherein he stated: ...... the effect the report will have upon the rights of the subject of the report. To be privileged, a mercantile agency's representatives must act impartially and in good faith, carefully evaluating all information before disseminating any defamatory statements to its subscribers. ...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Antwerp Diamond Exchange of America, Inc. v. Better Business Bureau of Maricopa County, Inc.,
130 Ariz. 523, 637 P.2d 733, Ariz., Nov 23, 1981

... the corporation's president brought action to recover against better business bureau and others for libel, for violation of consumer and credit reporting acts and for tortious interference with business relationships. The Superior Court, Maricopa County, Cause Nos. C-343298 and C-357073, Lawrence ..... for bureau on libel count; (3) corporation and president were not "consumers" so as to be protected by federal "Fair Credit Reporting Act" or State Consumer Reporting Agency Acts; and (4) genuine issues of material fact in regard to whether statements ...... stones and the corporation's president to recover against better business bureau and others for libel, for violation of consumer and credit reporting acts and for tortious interference with business relationships, genuine issues of material fact in regard to whether bureau recklessly ...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bloomfield v. Retail Credit Co.,
14 Ill.App.3d 158, 302 N.E.2d 88, Ill.App. 1 Dist., Aug 03, 1973

...Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, Fifth Division. Harold G. BLOOMFIELD, Plaintiff-Appellee, Cross-Appellant, v. RETAIL CREDIT COMPANY, a corporation, Defendant-Appellant, Cross-Appellee. No. 55319. Aug. 3, 1973. Action for libel based on investigative reports which defendant, a ..... COMPANY, a corporation, Defendant-Appellant, Cross-Appellee. No. 55319. Aug. 3, 1973. Action for libel based on investigative reports which defendant, a credit-reporting service, supplied to one of its subscribers about plaintiff, and for interfering with contractual relationship, invasion of privacy, and violation ..... (Formerly 237k12(2)) Plaintiff, suing for libel on basis of investigative report which defendant, a credit-reporting service, supplied to one of its subscribers about plaintiff, had to prove actual malice by preponderance of evidence, and not ...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Emo v. Milbank Mut. Ins. Co.,
183 N.W.2d 508, N.D., Jan 29, 1971

... and Slander ss 279, 280, 282, pp. 798--800. Cf. State v. Haider, 150 N.W.2d 71 (N.D.1967). In Bartels v. Retail Credit Company, 175 N.W.2d 292 (Neb.1967), in paragraphs 2, 3, and 4 of the syllabus, the Nebraska court held: '2. A ..... of the rights of the person injured as is equivalent to malice in fact. '3. To be privileged, a mercantile agency's representatives must act impartially and in good faith, carefully evaluating all information before disseminating any defamatory statements to its subscribers. ...... information only from reliable sources.' After reviewing the record, it cannot be said that Milbank and its investigatory agents used good faith; nor did they make a complete and thorough investigation. It is quite apparent that Milbank grossly disregarded the rights of ...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bartels v. Retail Credit Co., 185 Neb. 304, 175 N.W.2d 292, 40 A.L.R.3d 1039, Neb., Mar 13, 1970

...Supreme Court of Nebraska. Ervin F. BARTELS, Appellee, v. RETAIL CREDIT COMPANY, a Corporation, Appellant. No. 37338. March 13, 1970. Action for libel as a result of reports made by defendant ..... COMPANY, a Corporation, Appellant. No. 37338. March 13, 1970. Action for libel as a result of reports made by defendant credit agency to certain of its customers concerning character and personal habits of plaintiff. The District Court, Douglas County, Brodkey, J., ...... defendant appealed. The Supreme Court, Spencer, J., held, inter alia, that where jury was instructed that reports prepared by defendant credit agency for insurance companies concerning character and personal habits of allegedly defamed plaintiff were qualifiedly privileged, and that plaintiff could ...


Return to “Front End Duties of the Credit Reporting Agencies: 15 U.S.C. 1681e(b)”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest