Preponderance of the Evidence;Substantial Factor
Posted: Tue Nov 29, 2005 3:50 pm
One of the most difficult hurdles for a consumer is proving causation. In order to recover greater than nominal compensatory damages, Plaintiff must prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that damages were incurred. See Roemer v. Retail Credit Co., 44 Cal.App.3d 926, 119 Cal.Rptr. 82. One type of damage, credit denials, present a special causation problem. Plaintiff must show that the credit denial was caused by inaccurate data appearing in plaintiff's report issued by the agency. Further, plaintiff must tie the inaccuracies of the credit report to the consumer reporting agency's failure to employ "reasonable procedures" or other FCRA violations. 15 U.S.C. 1681e(b); Pendleton v. Trans Union Systems Corp., 76 F.R.D. 192 (U.S.D.C. E.D. Pa.); Cahlin v. GMAC, 936 F.2d 1151 (11th Cir. 1991).