David Schultz Analyzes in ARM Compliance Digest: Appeals Court Affirms Ruling in One BFE Case, Overturns Ruling in Another
In The News | 1 min read
Feb 14, 2022
In the February 14, 2022 edition of the ARM Compliance Digest, Hinshaw partner David Schultz discusses two rulings by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit involving cases involving a bona fide error defense. In the first, the court affirmed a summary judgment ruling in favor of a defendant that was sued for violating the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, while in the second it overturned a separate summary judgment ruling. The court did rule that the injuries suffered by the plaintiffs, which involved disputes that were not communicated to credit reporting agencies, were concrete enough for them to have standing to sue:
The 7th Circuit Ewing opinion packs a lot into it and is a real mixed bag. The opinion combines two cases that presented similar standing and bona fide error issues. At the heart of both suits were claims that agencies did not update credit reports with a dispute, to which the agencies argued they had a BFE – a pretty common claim and defense response.
The 7th Circuit ended a streak of finding no standing in FDCPA cases. It found standing here after first admitting that a key pre-Ramirez v Transunion standing case of its was wrong. It then went on a somewhat tortured analysis to distinguish Ramirez and hold that there was sufficient injury by communicating the trade line to the bureau without a dispute notation. It seems questionable that the Supreme Court will agree with the analysis.
On the bona fide error defense, it ruled in favor of one agency and against another. These were fact specific rulings but emphasized reasonable procedures that are subsequently followed. A nice tidbit was the discussion of the first element of the defense – "unintentional." The court ruled: "But Receivables needed to show only that its FDCPA violation was unintentional, not that its actions were unintentional." That is a low bar.
The standing ruling is a head-scratcher but the BFE ruling has some good guidance.
Read the full February 14, 2022 edition of the AccountsRecovery.net Compliance Digest.
Related People
Related Capabilities
Related Locations
Featured Insights

Press Release
Sep 22, 2026
Vaishali Rao Selected as a Global 2026 INvolve Heroes Role Model

Consumer Crossroads: Where Financial Services and Litigation Intersect
Sep 22, 2026
Another Court Finds the TCPA Does Not Apply to Texts —Time for Supreme Court Intervention?

Press Release
Sep 22, 2026
Min Kang Appointed to the Washington State Bar Association Board of Governors

In The News
Sep 22, 2026
Spencer Kook Analyzes California's Liability Influence in the National Insurance Market

In The News
Sep 21, 2026
Marisa Roman Cautions Clickwrap Agreements Are Not Enough to Let Companies Off “Scot-Free”

Press Release
Sep 18, 2026
Paris Glazer Named to Chicago Daily Law Bulletin’s 2026 40 Attorneys Under Forty

Consumer Crossroads: Where Financial Services and Litigation Intersect
Sep 17, 2026
Federal and State Regulators Continue Crackdown on Junk Fees

Press Release
Sep 17, 2026
Defense Verdict Reduces $134 Million Demand to $2 Million in Catastrophic Motorcycle Injury Case

Insights for Insurers Alert
Sep 16, 2026
America 250: The Nation’s Unique Contributions to Insurance Coverage Law and Litigation

In The News
Sep 15, 2026
Lucy Wang Discusses the California Insurance Commissioner’s Role in Protecting Consumers

Press Release
Sep 10, 2026
Hinshaw Attorneys Recognized as 2027 Lexology Index Thought Leaders: USA

In The News
Sep 10, 2026
Nicholas Ajello and Gregory Emry Analyze FAA’s Proposed BVLOS Drone Regulations

