The FTC and CFPB filed an amicus brief with the Third Circuit Court of Appeals to overturn a lower court ruling that exempted furnishers from investigating indirect disputes under the FCRA. The brief argues that all disputes must be investigated to ensure consumers can correct inaccurate credit information and be notified of outcomes, upholding key FCRA protections.
In-house legal teams should review vendor agreements where the company acts as a furnisher of data to credit reporting agencies (like Experian) and customer-facing agreements related to credit reporting services. Key clauses to examine include data accuracy warranties, dispute investigation procedures, compliance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), and obligations to notify consumers of dispute outcomes. Given this enforcement focus, contracts may need amendments to explicitly require investigation of both direct and indirect disputes, establish clear timelines for responses, and ensure robust record-keeping to demonstrate FCRA adherence. Additionally, audit rights and indemnification provisions should be assessed to allocate risk for potential FCRA violations arising from inaccurate data furnishing.
Entity
Experian
Industry
Data BrokerOfficial Press Release
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2022/09/ftc-cfpb-submit-amicus-brief-defending-consumers-ability-dispute-inaccurate-items-credit-reports
ftc cfpb submit amicus brief defending consumers ability dis
https://www.ftc.gov/legal-library/browse/amicus-briefs/ftc-cfpb-submit-amicus-brief-defending-consumers-ability-dispute-inaccurate-items-credit-reports
Federal Trade Commission Enforcement Page
https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement
"Ingram v. Experian"
"Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA)"
"consumers are entitled to be notified about the outcome of their disputes"
The FTC referred a complaint against REPS & Company Inc. and company executives, alleging they bypassed ticket-issuer security controls and purchasing limits to acquire millions of tickets for resale. The complaint was filed by the Department of Justice, and the case will be decided by the court; the press release does not report a penalty or other remedy imposed.
The FTC sued Digital Forensics Corporation LLC and affiliated defendants, alleging they misled sextortion victims with promises of investigative and monitoring services that often were not provided, and used fake positive reviews. A federal court granted the FTC’s request to temporarily halt the defendants’ activities; the complaint remains for the court to decide.
The FTC alleged that Greenway Auto Group advertised vehicle prices thousands of dollars below the amounts consumers actually paid and used mailers falsely suggesting recipients had won cash prizes. Greenway agreed to an order requiring transparent pricing and prohibiting deceptive prize mailers and other misrepresentations; the press release does not state a monetary penalty.
The FTC sent warning letters to 24 large healthcare services companies, cautioning that incomplete, inaccurate, or untimely pricing information for scheduled medical care may be unfair or deceptive. The letters urge recipients to review their price-disclosure practices and take corrective action; they announce no fine or formal order.
$1.9M
The FTC alleged that Premier Franchising Group LLC and Franchise Fastlane LLC made deceptive and unsubstantiated claims about the Premier Martial Arts franchise opportunity and violated the Franchise Rule. The proposed settlements require the companies to pay a combined $1.85 million to compensate franchisees, prohibit certain misrepresentations, and require Franchise Rule compliance; certain franchisees may also cancel their agreements without penalty.
The FTC, Utah, and Nevada sued Lens.com Inc., alleging that it advertised artificially low contact lens prices while hiding mandatory checkout charges and misleading consumers about its AutoRefill subscription. The complaint seeks to stop the alleged practices; the court has not yet decided the case, and no penalty or remedy has been imposed.