Skip to main content

Search

Federal Deception Law: WASHINGTON

Wash. Rev. Code §§ 9A.82.010 to 9A.82.902

Predicate Offenses: List of state offenses, including extortion, collection of unlawful debt, collection of extortionate extension of credit, telephone solicitation violations, securities fraud, pursuing a pattern of skimming homeowners’ equity, identity theft, and unlicensed practice of profession or business. Securities fraud may be a predicate offense only if defendant has been convicted criminally.

Federal Deception Law: WISCONSIN

Wis. Stat. §§ 946.80 to 946.93

Predicate Offenses: List of state offenses, including securities offenses, franchise law violations, loan sharking, identity theft and some frauds, plus offenses listed in federal RICO, certain types of welfare fraud.

Pattern: Three or more similar or related predicate offenses, the motive of which is to derive pecuniary gain. Last offense must have occurred within seven years of the first, and at least one must have occurred after April 27, 1982.

Fair Credit Reporting: L.2 Orders Against Experian (Formerly TRW)

FTC v. TRW, Inc., 784 F. Supp. 361 (N.D. Tex. 1991) (consent order), amended by (N.D. Tex. Jan. 14, 1993) (agreed order amending consent order). This FTC enforcement action brought against TRW [now Experian] resulted from widespread dissatisfaction with the accuracy of reported information and apparent systematic FCRA compliance difficulties.

Fair Credit Reporting: L.3 Orders Against Equifax

In re Equifax, Inc., 96 F.T.C. 1045 (1980) (opinion and final order), rev’d in part, 678 F.2d 1047 (11th Cir. 1982). Just a few years after enactment of the FCRA, the FTC initiated a major, protracted enforcement action against Equifax, then known as Retail Credit Company. A voluminous record resulted in an FTC order addressing a wide variety of improper, commonplace practices. Parts of the final order concerning internal incentive plans for employees and offices were set aside upon appeal, but the rest of the FTC adjudication remains in place.

Fair Credit Reporting: L.4 Orders Against TransUnion

In re Trans Union Credit Info. Co., 102 F.T.C. 1109 (F.T.C. 1983) (consent order). An FTC investigation that addressed, among other issues, the provision of reports to detective agencies and government agencies, the delayed deletion of obsolete credit account information, the premature deletion of non-derogatory information, the disclosure of file information to consumers, and reinvestigation of disputed information.

Fair Credit Reporting: L.6 Orders Against Specialty Consumer Reporting Agencies

In re Howard Enters., Inc., 93 F.T.C. 909 (F.T.C. June 12, 1979). The FTC issued a complaint alleging that this company failed to comply with the FCRA despite the fact that the bad check lists it issued constituted consumer reports, and the company was a consumer reporting agency. Specifically, the FTC alleged that the company failed to maintain reasonable procedures to ensure accuracy and to ensure that its reports were furnished only to users with a permissible purpose.

Fair Credit Reporting: L.9 Orders Against Furnishers

U.S. v. Performance Capital Mgmt., Inc., No. 982 3542 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 24, 2000) (consent decree), available at www.ftc.gov. The FTC alleged that a debt buyer furnished CRAs with inaccurate delinquency dates, using more recent dates instead of the date the debt was first delinquent, failed to reinvestigate consumer disputes referred by CRAs, and failed to notify CRAs when consumers disputed collection accounts with the debt buyer.

Fair Credit Reporting: L.10 Orders Against Identity Thieves

FTC v. a Minor (C.D. Cal. 2003) (stipulated final judgment and order for permanent injunction and other equitable relief). This order is against an identity thief who allegedly used hijacked corporate logos and deceptive spam to con consumers out of credit card numbers and other financial data. The FTC alleged that the scam, called “phishing,” had the thief posing as America Online and sending consumers e-mail messages claiming that there had been a problem with the billing of their AOL account.

Fair Credit Reporting: 18.2 Privacy from Governmental Intrusion

Many constitutions and statutes create a right of privacy against intrusion by a government and its agencies. For example, the United States Constitution prohibits governments from conducting unreasonable searches and seizures27 and from enacting laws that violate the Fourteenth Amendment’s guarantee of privacy.28 As a general rule, government agencies cannot freely disclose the information they have gathered on individuals.

Fair Credit Reporting: 18.3.2 Applicability to Consumer Reporting

Even if one of the four torts constituting the tort of invasion of privacy may be appropriate for a particular consumer, the FCRA provides qualified immunity from privacy actions based on information disclosed pursuant to specific provisions of the FCRA.47 This immunity extends to consumer reporting agencies and those who use their information and furnish information to them.48 If the immunity applies, the plaintiff must show that the information was both false and furnished with malice or willful i

Fair Credit Reporting: 18.4.1.6.3 Categories of exempted disclosures

In addition to affiliate disclosures, Regulation P describes three sets of exempt disclosures. The first two sets of disclosures are exempt not just from the privacy notices but also from the consumer’s opt-out rights. That is, a financial institution need not disclose that it will make these disclosures, even to nonaffiliated third parties (beyond a statement that the institution will “make disclosures to nonaffiliated third parties . . .

Fair Credit Reporting: 18.4.1.7.2 When a privacy notice must be given

The time the institution must give the notice depends on whether the consumer has customer status.169 Customers must be given the notice no later than the time the customer relationship starts,170 except in two cases: when someone other than the customer establishes the customer relationship,171 or when providing the notice would substantially delay the customer’s transaction and the customer agrees to receive notice at a later time.

Fair Credit Reporting: 18.4.1.7.5 Model privacy notice

Regulation P provides for a model privacy form that provides a safe harbor for institutions that use it.189 In developing the model privacy form, the original regulators who created the form190 had studied the privacy notices that financial institutions had been using to comply with the GLBA and observed that many were “long and complex.”191 Perhaps of even more concern, some institutions added opening statements to their notices that claimed how m

Fair Credit Reporting: 18.4.1.8.1 Introduction

The opt-out right is the core privacy protection of the GLBA. However, it applies only to nonexempt disclosures of nonpublic personal information to a nonaffiliated third party. Note that if a financial institution does not make nonexempt disclosures of nonpublic personal information, then the GLBA, as modified by the FAST Act, permits the institution to forgo annual privacy notices.194

Fair Credit Reporting: 18.4.1.8.2 The opt-out notice

If an institution wants to disclose, or to reserve the right to disclose, nonpublic personal information about a consumer to a nonaffiliated third party, the institution must furnish the consumer with an opt-out notice that meets the Act’s requirements. The foremost of these requirements is that the institution provide “a clear and conspicuous notice . . .

Fair Credit Reporting: 18.4.1.8.3 Exercise of the opt-out right

Regulation P requires an institution to comply with a consumer’s opt-out direction “as soon as reasonably practicable after [the institution] receives it.”215 The opt-out continues until the consumer revokes it in writing or electronically.216 Until it is revoked, the consumer may exercise the opt-out right at any time.217