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"
$930K
The FTC finalized orders requiring CMG Media Corporation (doing business as Cox Media Group), MindSift LLC, and 1010 Digital Works LLC to pay a total of $930,000 for falsely claiming they offered an AI-powered service that could target ads based on conversations captured from consumers' smart devices, and that consumers had opted into such targeting. The orders also prohibit the companies from making misrepresentations about their advertising services, voice data collection, and consumer consent.
The FTC announced it is seeking public comment on a proposed enforcement policy statement regarding personalized pricing, which is the use of personal data to set prices based on what a company believes an individual consumer is willing to spend. The statement warns that undisclosed collection or use of personal data for personalized pricing could violate the FTC Act's prohibition on unfair or deceptive practices. The Commission voted 2-0 to authorize the Federal Register notice.
$4.0M
The FTC and Connecticut secured a $4 million settlement with Chase Nissan LLC (doing business as Manchester City Nissan) over allegations the dealership charged consumers unauthorized fees, including double-charging for 'certified pre-owned' vehicles and inserting charges like total loss protection into financing agreements without consent. The settlement requires $4 million in consumer redress, prohibits misrepresentations about vehicle certification and warranties, mandates prominent disclosure of the maximum total vehicle price, and requires express informed consent for all charges.
The FTC filed a complaint against Credit Glory LLC and related entities for deceptive credit repair practices, including false promises, impersonating debt collectors, charging illegal upfront fees, and using negative option billing without consent. A federal court temporarily halted the operation.
The FTC issued a policy statement abandoning disparate-impact liability, stating it will no longer bring claims based on this theory. It also modified compliance obligations for several companies based on past decisions.
The FTC, along with Utah and California, filed a complaint against Hims & Hers alleging the telehealth provider shared consumers' sensitive health information with third-party advertising platforms without consent, and deceived consumers about billing and cancellation practices. The complaint alleges violations of the FTC Act and the Restore Online Shoppers' Confidence Act.