To embed, copy and paste the code into your website or blog:
Virginia recently joined California in enacting a comprehensive data protection law intended to protect the privacy of its residents. The Virginia Consumer Data Protection Act (the “VCDPA”) is scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2023, so impacted businesses have significant lead time to prepare. This is the first of two posts covering the VCDPA.
The VCDPA has two main goals: (1) providing Virginia residents with expanded rights in connection with their personal data, and (2) imposing obligations on businesses, such as securing personal data, limiting use of personal data to disclosed purposes, and flowing down requirements to processors receiving personal data. While many of the details differ, the overall approach of the VCDPA is very reminiscent of the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”) but without some of the more prescriptive elements. Businesses with existing GDPR or Cal
MLS PIN Integrates Rental Beast Tools - Banker & Tradesman bankerandtradesman.com - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from bankerandtradesman.com Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
Published: 09 May 2021 09 May 2021
Washington, DC - The Department of Justice, together with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), announced a $20 million settlement resolving alleged violations of the FTC Act and the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), including violations of the Red Flags Rule. The settlement includes $15 million in civil penalties, which represents the largest civil penalty ever paid to resolve FCRA violations under the FTC Act.
Vivint Smart Home Inc. sells “smart” home security and monitoring systems, largely via a sales force that sells door-to-door. The complaint alleges that Vivint failed to implement an Identity Theft Prevention Program, allowing its sales representatives to obtain credit reports of unsuspecting consumers without the consumers’ knowledge or consent, and unfairly sold false debt to buyers or debt collectors. According to the complaint, the defendant’s lack of an Identity Theft Prevention Program violated the FTC’s Red Flags Rule, w
To embed, copy and paste the code into your website or blog:
On April 5, 2021, the Eleventh Circuit reversed a district court’s denial of a defendant’s motion to compel arbitration in a Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”) lawsuit arising from a former Comcast customer’s re-application for services, holding that the FCRA claim related to a prior agreement that contained an arbitration provision. The case is noteworthy in that it involved a particularly sweeping arbitration provision applying broadly to
all disputes between the parties, even those arising after the services agreement was terminated that the Eleventh Circuit had not previously considered. The court ultimately did not reach the question of the provision’s enforceability, however, instead remanding the case to the district court to determine its enforceability in the first instance.
Judge James Teilborg of the U.S. District Court Judge for the District of Arizona
awarded Thomas McDermott over $17,000 in damages and attorney’s fees after he obtained a default judgment against collection agency, Perfection Collection LLC (Perfection Collection), for violating the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) by furnishing inaccurate information when it reported a delinquent home monitoring alarm system account (Account) that was more than seven years old.
McDermott ceased making payments on the Account in 2011, which was ultimately placed with Perfection Collection in 2019. Perfection Collection reported the Account to two national consumer reporting agencies (NCRA), one of which verified the Account information was accurate. After learning the Account was appearing on his credit report, McDermott disputed the Account to both NCRAs that originally reported the Account, claiming that the Account should not appear on his credit report because it is more than seven years old