Dirk Westra v. Credit Control of Pinellas

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that the reasonableness of an investigation under the Fair Credit Reporting Act is a factual question normally reserved for trial
• finding that the defendant furnisher’s five-step investigation procedure is, as a matter of law, reasonable
• suggesting that \requiring a furnisher to automatically contact every consumer who disputes a debt would be terribly inefficient and such action is not mandated by the FCRA\
• holding that investigation was reasonable beyond question when furnisher verified consumer's name, address and date of birth after receiving an ACDV from a CRA with a dispute code indicating that the consumer was disputing the charge on the basis that the account did not belong to him
• outlining steps a furnisher of information must take after being notified of a dispute by a consumer reporting agency
• finding furnisher’s investigation “reasonable given the scant information it received [from the CRA] regarding the nature of Westra’s dispute.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).