Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Date: 02-16-2023
Case Style:
Poya Sadeghi v. Mercedes-Benz Financial Services USA, L.L.C.
Case Number: 0:22-cv-02936
Judge: Eric C. Tostrud
Court: United States District Court for the District of Minnesota (Hennepin County)
Plaintiff's Attorney:
Defendant's Attorney: Andrew R. Shedlock
Description: Minneapolis, Minnesota consumer credit lawyer represented Plaintiff, which sued Defendant on a Fair Credit Reporting Act violation theory.
The Act (Title VI of the Consumer Credit Protection Act) protects information collected by consumer reporting agencies such as credit bureaus, medical information companies and tenant screening services. Information in a consumer report cannot be provided to anyone who does not have a purpose specified in the Act. Companies that provide information to consumer reporting agencies also have specific legal obligations, including the duty to investigate disputed information. In addition, users of the information for credit, insurance, or employment purposes must notify the consumer when an adverse action is taken on the basis of such reports. The Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act added many provisions to this Act primarily relating to record accuracy and identity theft. The Dodd-Frank Act transferred to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau most of the rulemaking responsibilities added to this Act by the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act and the Credit CARD Act, but the Commission retains all its enforcement authority.
Outcome: Settled for an undisclosed sum and dismissed with prejudice.
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments: