Summary
The United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina converted the defendant’s motion to dismiss into a motion for summary judgment with the parties’ consent and granted it. The court held that Latino Community Credit Union had a permissible purpose under the Fair Credit Reporting Act to obtain Brittney Moseley’s credit report in connection with her membership application, and therefore rejected her FCRA and North Carolina Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Act claims. The court also denied Moseley’s motions to amend, for summary judgment, early discovery, sanctions, and a temporary restraining order, and directed the clerk to close the case.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the defendant's motion to dismiss should be converted into a motion for summary judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(d).
- Whether the undisputed evidence established that the defendant had a permissible purpose and consumer authorization under 15 U.S.C. § 1681b(a) to obtain Moseley's credit report.
- Whether Moseley's Fair Credit Reporting Act claim failed as a matter of law.
- Whether Moseley's North Carolina Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Act claim failed because the credit-report access was authorized and connected to her account application.
- Whether leave to file a third amended complaint should be denied as futile.
Holdings
- The court converted the defendant's motion to dismiss into a motion for summary judgment because it considered materials outside the pleadings and the parties had a reasonable opportunity to present pertinent materials.
- The defendant was entitled to summary judgment on Moseley's FCRA claim because the undisputed application and account documents established that Moseley authorized the defendant to obtain her credit report for a permissible purpose under 15 U.S.C. § 1681b(a).
- The defendant was entitled to summary judgment on Moseley's UDTPA claim because obtaining a credit report in connection with a financial-account application with the consumer's consent was not unfair or deceptive conduct.
- Leave to file a third amended complaint was denied as futile.
Key quotations
“Taken together, these documents establish that Latino had a permissible purpose under § 1681b(a) when it obtained Moseley's credit report.” (III)
“For the same reasons, Moseley's UDTPA claim likewise fails; it is not an unfair or deceptive action to obtain a credit report in connection with an application to open a financial account with the consent of the consumer.” (III)
Factual background
Brittney Moseley electronically submitted an online application for a share or membership account with Latino Community Credit Union. The application, immediately above her electronic signature, authorized the credit union to verify the information provided and obtain a current credit report or conduct necessary credit investigations. The credit union's account rules also authorized it to obtain credit reports to verify eligibility for requested accounts and services. Moseley nevertheless alleged that the credit report access lacked authorization and a permissible purpose, causing credit-related and emotional harm.
Procedural history
Moseley filed suit alleging that Latino Community Credit Union unlawfully obtained her credit report in connection with an online membership-account application. After the second amended complaint and a motion for early discovery, the defendant moved to dismiss. Moseley filed motions for early discovery, spoliation sanctions, a temporary restraining order, summary judgment, and leave to file a third amended complaint. The court converted the dismissal motion to summary judgment, granted the defendant judgment, denied the other substantive motions, denied amendment as futile, and closed the matter.