In this case, the plaintiff claimed that the defendant violated FCRA regulations by obtaining her credit report without a permissible purpose and without required authorization. Originally, it was determined by the District Court that the plaintiff failed to sufficiently demonstrate a concrete injury in order to satisfy Article III standing under Spokeo. As such, the District Court dismissed the claim, contending that the defendant did nothing harmful to the plaintiff with the information and that the plaintiff's allegations were only that of "a bare procedural violation without identifying any concrete harm."

Conversely, the Ninth Circuit held that section 1681b(f)(1) of the FCRA "protects the consumer's substantive privacy interest" by prohibiting third parties from "obtaining a credit report for a purpose not otherwise authorized." The Ninth Circuit added that because any violation of this section "offends the interest that the statute protects," a plaintiff "has standing to vindicate her right to privacy under the FCRA when a third-party obtains her credit report without a purpose authorized by the statute, regardless of whether the credit report is published or otherwise used by that third-party." Ultimately, the Ninth Circuit found that the plaintiff's allegation did meet the threshold to establish Article III standing. As such, the District Court decision was reversed.

SOURCE

Posted: February 19, 2020

All Rights Reserved © 2020 Truescreen, Inc.
This document and/or presentation is provided as a service to our customers. Its contents are designed solely for informational purposes, and should not be inferred or understood as legal advice or binding case law, nor shared with any third parties. Persons in need of legal assistance should seek the advice of competent legal counsel. Although care has been taken in preparation of these materials, we cannot guarantee the accuracy, currency or completeness of the information contained within it. Anyone using this information does so at his or her own risk.