Pintos v. Pac. Creditors Ass'n, 04-17485, 04-17558

In an action brought claiming defendant-collection agency violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) by obtaining, without any FCRA-sanctioned purpose, a credit report on her from a credit reporting agency, and that the reporting agency violated the FCRA by furnishing the report, summary judgment for defendants is reversed as: 1) collection agency obtained a credit report on plaintiff for debt collection efforts unrelated to a proper credit transaction, in violation of the FCRA; 2) under 15 U.S.C. section 1681e, defendant-collector's "blanket certification" that it would use the credit reports only for permissible purposes did not absolve defendant-reporting agency from its independent obligation to verify the certification and determine that no reasonable grounds existed for suspecting impermissible use; and 3) thus, genuine issues of material fact remained with regard to the reporting agency's liability.

Appellate Information

• Argued 01/09/2007
• Submitted 01/09/2007
• Decided 09/21/2007
• Published 09/21/2007

Judges

• Before:  MARY M. SCHROEDER, RICHARD R. CLIFTON, and CARLOS T. BEA, Circuit Judges.

Court

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• Andrew J. Ogilvie (argued), Kemnitzer, Anderson, Barron, Ogilvie & Brewer, LLP, San Francisco, CA, for appellant/cross-appellee Maria E. Pintos., Daniel J. McLoon (argued), Jones Day, Los Angeles, CA, Adam R. Sand and Marc S. Carlson, Jones Day, San Francisco, CA, for appellee/cross-appellant Experian Information Solutions, Inc., Andrew M. Steinheimer (argued) and Mark E. Ellis, Ellis Coleman Poirier LaVoie & Steinheimer, LLP, Sacramento, CA, for appellee Pacific Creditors Association.