On June 6, 2024, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York dismissed claims for violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA)—15 U.S.C. §§ 1681e(b) and 1681i in particular—against a credit reporting agency where plaintiff “has not adequately pleaded an inaccuracy because she fails to specify what information in her credit report was incorrect and why” and has not alleged facts regarding the credit reporting agency’s procedures to ensure the accuracy of its reports or to investigate disputed information.[1]

Case Background

In Rogers, the pro se plaintiff brought claims against Equifax Information Services LLC (Equifax) for violations of the FCRA, alleging that Equifax failed to maintain accurate information for the plaintiff’s credit report and to correct the inaccurate information upon investigating the plaintiff’s evidence of inaccuracy. Equifax moved to dismiss.

Court’s Reasoning for FCRA Dismissal

The court granted Equifax’s motion after concluding that “[p]laintiff fails to adequately allege that Equifax violated Section 1681e(b) or 1681i” as she “makes only conclusory allegations that Equifax reported ‘inaccurate information’ and ‘did not delete names, addresses, and other contact information that were inaccurate.” Meanwhile, claims under such provisions of the FCRA require a plaintiff to “plausibly allege (among other things) that (i) her credit report contained disputed information that is inaccurate, and (ii) the defendant failed to follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of a report, or to reinvestigate.”

Additionally, the court in Rogers found that since “Sections 1681e(b) and 1681i do not impose strict liability for inaccuracies, the failure to allege what steps Equifax took or failed to take pertaining to the accuracy of its reports is an independent basis to dismiss plaintiff’s FCRA claims.”

Besides, the court dismissed the plaintiff’s related common law causes of action for defamation of character and “assumption of duty” as preempted by the FCRA, as well as determined that the plaintiff failed to state a claim for violations of the New York Fair Credit Reporting Act (NYFCRA), N.Y.G.B.L. §§ 380-j(a), 380-h(a), and 380-h(b), as NYFCRA does not require a consumer reporting agency to supply a copy of investigative reports to a consumer upon her request.

Implications of the Rogers Decision on FCRA Claims

The Rogers decision confirms that FCRA claims against credit reporting agencies require consumers—as a threshold matter—to sufficiently identify in the complaint the inaccurate information appearing on their credit report, to explain why it is inaccurate, as well as to include factual allegations regarding the steps undertaken by a credit reporting agency to assure the accuracy of its data or to investigate reporting disputes. Otherwise, such claims are facially dismissible as a matter of law.

[1] Rogers v. Equifax Info. Services LLC, 23-CV-0537 (RPK) (TAM), 2024 WL 2862363 (E.D.N.Y. June 6, 2024).