Question

The FCRA requires that credit-reporting agencies “follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information.” In October of 1989, Renie Guimond became aware of, and notified the credit bureau Trans Union about, inaccuracies in her credit report: that she was married (and it listed a Social Security number for this nonexistent spouse), that she was also known as Ruth Guimond, and that she had a Saks Fifth Avenue credit card. About a month later, Trans Union responded to Guimond’s letter, stating that the erroneous information had been removed. But in March of 1990, Trans Union again published the erroneous information it purportedly had removed. Guimond then requested the source of the erroneous information, to which Trans Union responded that it could not disclose the identity of the source because it did not know its source. The disputed information was eventually removed from Guimond’s file in October 1990. When Guimond sued, Trans Union defended that she had no claim because no credit was denied to her as a result of the inaccuracies in her credit file. The lower court dismissed her case; she appealed. To what damages, if any, is Guimond entitled?

Answer 1

ANSWER :

Renie Guimond initially has placed her complient and got the mistakes corrected by Trans Union. But after a month latter the same mistakes got repeated . She complained to thenm and asked to give her the source from where Trans Union got the information ? Which they refused to revel and they said they dosen't know the source.

Their stand is not correct. Reine is entitled to those details , so that she can lodge a formal complaint with them to rectify it . In this situation Reine is entited for the following Damages :

Under FCRA she can sue for ;

1. Statutory damages of $100 to $1000 per violation.

2. For actual damages if any she suffered.

3. For Emotional Damages for stress suffered.

4. Punitive damages to punish the violators for their action or inaction.

Normally an affected party or a consumer cannot sue the Credit Rating agency straight away. First the consumer , here Reine has to dispute the false information or wrong information given about her through the credit rating agency. Here she did it and asked for the Source from which the agency got the informations about her. They were duty bound to disclose it to her. but they refused it . But they made the wrong information about her corrected. But after a month the same mistake was repeated .

In such situation she can sue and she did it. But sice she has not been denied any credit based on those informations , the lower court dismissed her petetion .

In the appeal she can definetely calim for the damages mentioned above.