Two weeks ago, we attended the ACA International Annual Convention in Nashville.  One of the more interesting discussions focused on compliance lessons creditors and debt collectors can take away from recent court decisions.

Some of them were easy. For example, in Armata v. Target Corp., 2018 WL 3097094 (Mass. Sup. Ct. June 25, 2018),

In 2010, Congress enacted the Dodd-Frank Act, which created the largely independent Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) and empowered it with broad authority to investigate violations of consumer financial protection laws, including the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”).  Since then, the CFPB has grown in size and budget every year, along with an attendant annual

According to a report from leading litigation-monitoring service WebRecon, Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) filings have begun to outnumber Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) filings across the country in recent months. This development represents a drastic shift in consumer protection litigation, as TCPA filings had consistently outpaced FCRA filings over the previous two years.  In

In Ratliff v. A&R Logistics, Inc., the plaintiff claimed A&R denied him a job based on a background check without the appropriate adverse action process. Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), notice pre- and post-adverse action must occur under prescribed timelines and must contain specific information outlined under the statute in order to