District Court (Nev.) Says Creditor Might Not Have Had a Permissible Purpose as a Creditor to Pull a Consumer Report, when Debtor Says Creditor Knew Where She Was and Consumer Report Was Pulled After Litigation

Section 1681b(a) of FCRA states that in general, “any consumer reporting agency may furnish a consumer report under the following circumstances and no other,” before listing several permissible purposes for obtaining or disclosing consumer reports. 15 U.S.C. § 1681b(a). Using the report in support of litigation is not among the listed permissible purposes. See id.; see also Mone v. Dranow, 945 F.2d 306, 308 (9th Cir. 1991) (finding that using a credit report in litigation is not a “legitimate business need” under the statute and thus not a permissible purpose (citing 15 U.S.C. § 1681b(3)(E))). A person who obtains a report for anything other than a listed purpose violates the statute. See Mone, 945 F.2d at 307 (holding that a “consumer whose credit report is obtained for reasons other than those listed in the statute may recover actual and punitive damages ….”).  First Choice manager Janie Chavez testified in her deposition that the report was obtained because First Choice had “lost contact” with Rodriguez and was trying “to locate [her] and find out what’s going on.” ECF No. 26, Ex. 1. Rodriguez argues this cannot be the case, as First Choice had called both her and her references and visited her house multiple times, so it clearly knew where she lived and was in contact with her. Furthermore, the report was obtained after Rodriguez’s initial complaint was filed, so First Choice was aware she was represented by counsel and had counsel’s contact information. There is a genuine dispute as to the purpose for which First Choice obtained Rodriguez’s credit report. Drawing all inferences in favor of Rodriguez, a reasonable jury could find First Choice obtained Rodriguez’s report for use in this litigation, which is not a permissible purpose under 15 U.S.C. § 1681b.