Dislcosing Records Per Subpoena Not a Violation of 1681m

David A. Szwak

Dislcosing Records Per Subpoena Not a Violation of 1681m

Postby David A. Szwak » Fri Dec 02, 2005 9:22 pm

In Schoka v. General Motors Acc. Corp., 1 F.3d 1247 [Table, unpublished], 1993 Westlaw 290143 [9th Cir. 1993] [Nev.], a pro se plaintiff sued a car dealership for releasing auto sales documents, including his credit records obtained in the course of the sale, to the District Attorney’s Office in response to a valid subpoena for records. Plaintiff alleged the car dealer violated the FCRA. Summary judgment was granted in defendant’s favor and the court of appeals affirmed. The car dealer is not a consumer reporting agency. The dealer was not liable under the “user” provisions, 1681b, 1681m. The dealer did not impermissibly access plaintiff’s report since they pulled the report in the course of selling an auto to plaintiff. The dealer had not pulled the report for the purpose of furthering the subsequent criminal investigation. Release of financial data accumulated under these circumstances is not a consumer report. Caveat: Regardless of the ultimate merit of the complaint, plaintiff failed here because, like many plaintiffs, he was trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. It was not an FCRA claim.

Return to “Adverse Action Notice Rules: 15 U.S.C. 1681m and ECOA”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest