Transunion has had a very long history of ignoring valid disputes regarding inquiries on credit reports. This stems from a purposefully misunderstanding of the FCRA which discusses permissible purpose.
The Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) has a strict limit on who can check your credit and under what circumstance. The law regulates credit reporting and ensures that only business entities with a specific, legitimate purpose, and not members of the general public, can check your credit without written permission.
To access your report, an organization must have what's called "permissible purpose."
Duane E. NORMAN, filed a lawsuit against Transunion LLC.,
The case is NORMAN V TRANS UNION LLC. Duane E. NORMAN, Sr., on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, filed a lawsuit against Transunion. Transunion regularly decides to ignore disputes regarding inquiries because their interpretation of the FCRA is that regardless if there was permissible purpose or not, its a record that must be maintained and if you disagree you must contact the company who pulled your credit. Transunion admits that it does not conduct investigations for inquiries because according to their interpretation of the FCRA a consumer's file “accurately reflected that an inquiry had been made”; See CIVIL ACTION No. 18-5225 NORMAN V TRANS UNION LLC.
United States District Judge McHugh, further held that Transunion “has an artificially narrow view of its obligations under § 1681i(a), one that is inconsistent with the text and structure of § 1681i(a), and Third Circuit precedent, particularly Cushman v. Trans Union Corp. , 115 F.3d 220 (3d Cir. 1997), the Court's seminal pronouncement concerning the scope of an agency's reinvestigation obligation under § 1681i(a).”
Wow an artificial narrow view of its obligations under § 1681i(a).
Let's take a look at § 1681i(a):
“(a)Reinvestigations of disputed information
(1)Reinvestigation required
(A)In general
Subject to subsection (f) and except as provided in subsection (g), if the completeness or accuracy of any item of information contained in a consumer’s file at a consumer reporting agency is disputed by the consumer and the consumer notifies the agency directly, or indirectly through a reseller, of such dispute, the agency shall, free of charge, conduct a reasonable reinvestigation to determine whether the disputed information is inaccurate and record the current status of the disputed information, or delete the item from the file in accordance with paragraph (5), before the end of the 30-day period beginning on the date on which the agency receives the notice of the dispute from the consumer or reseller.”
So if an inquiry is being disputed because it was not authorized by you (the consumer) then the credit bureau has an obligation to investigate the accuracy of the inquiry not as Transunion does and just tell you to dispute it with the creditor who checked your credit report, as this would go against the literal plain english wording of the FCRA (“if the completeness or accuracy of any item of information contained in a consumer’s file at a consumer reporting agency is disputed by the consumer and the consumer notifies the agency directly, or indirectly through a reseller, of such dispute, the agency shall, free of charge, conduct a reasonable reinvestigation to determine whether the disputed information is inaccurate and record the current status of the disputed information, or delete the item from the file in accordance with paragraph (5), before the end of the 30-day period beginning on the date on which the agency receives the notice of the dispute from the consumer or reseller.”) and the spirit of the FCRA.
This all being said, Transunion has it coming for them!
We will keep everyone posted regarding this suit.
To update your contact information with the class administrator, visit the case website’s address update form.
https://www.transuniondisputeclassaction.com/page/update-address