The Bureau, joined by the Federal Trade Commission, filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit arguing that (1) the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) requires credit reporting agencies to follow reasonable procedures to ensure that consumer reports are both legally and factually accurate, (2) a credit reporting agency’s reliance on information provided by a furnisher does not absolve it of potential liability under this provision of the FCRA.
The CFPB is responsible for implementing many federal laws that relate to consumer finance. Courts sometimes apply those same laws to resolve disputes between private parties. In some cases, we believe a court would benefit from hearing our views on what the law says.
The amicus program is how we share our views with to the court. (“Amicus” is shorthand for “Amicus curiae”, Latin for “friend of the court.”) Our amicus briefs provide the courts with the CFPB’s views on significant consumer financial protection issues and help ensure that consumer financial protection statutes and regulations are correctly and consistently interpreted.
Recently filed amicus briefs
The Bureau filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit arguing that (1) the Fair Credit Reporting Act requires furnishers to conduct reasonable investigations of both legal and factual questions posted in consumer disputes, and (2) each time a furnisher fails to reasonably investigate a dispute results in a new statutory violation, with its own statute of limitations.
The Bureau filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit arguing that Regulation X requires a mortgage loan servicer to respond to a borrower’s request for information regarding the borrower’s loan, including when the information requested does not relate specifically to servicing.
The government filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit arguing that the Military Lending Act covers a loan issued to a servicemember when it is used to finance both the purchase of a vehicle and the purchase of a GAP insurance policy.
The Bureau, along with three partner agencies, jointly filed an amicus brief arguing that the “applicants” protected by the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and its implementing rule include those who have received credit.
Suggest a case
We welcome your suggestions of cases that might make good candidates for the amicus program. We strongly recommend that you read our FAQs before submitting your request, especially if you are not an attorney.