In this month’s newsletter:

• Third Circuit Finds that Determining Accuracy Under the FCRA Should be Based on a "Reasonable Reader" Standard

• Tenth Circuit Finds that Materiality Must be Determined Through the Perspective of the "Reasonable Consumer"

• Early-Out Services Are Not "Debt Collectors" for Purposes of the FDCPA

In a recently decided precedential decision, Marissa Bibbs v. Trans Union LLC, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals considered the accuracy of Trans Union’s credit reporting under a “reasonable reader” standard rather than the often-applied “reasonable creditor” standard. This consolidated appeal originated from three district court cases involving alleged violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”) in which the district courts all granted Trans Union’s motions for judgment on the pleadings based on a “reasonable creditor” standard. MORE >

In a recent Tenth Circuit decision, the Court of Appeals considered whether an alleged violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA) was material under a “reasonable consumer” standard rather than a “least sophisticated consumer” standard. See Tavernaro v. Pioneer Credit Recovery, Inc., No. 20-3219, 2022 WL 3153234 (10th Cir. Aug. 8, 2022). MORE >

In Palacio v. Med. Fin. Sols., No. 21 CV 1288 (N.D. Ill. June 14, 2022), the court concluded that an early-out entity providing services on behalf of a medical provider did not constitute a “debt collector” for purposes of the Fair Debt Collection Practice Acts ("FDCPA"). In Palacio, the defendant early-out entity sent the plaintiff statements to collect money that she owed to a medical facility. The statements did not contain disclosures advising that the entity was a debt collector, which is required of debt collectors subject to the FDCPA. However, the statements advised that the debt was not currently in default. MORE >