A Consumer Protection and Employment Law Firm Serving California, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Illinois.

Credit Reporting Errors: How to Fix Your Credit Report and Sue for Damages

Table Of Contents
Summarize with
ChatGPT Claude Gemini Perplexity Grok

Key Takeaways

  • FCRA requires credit bureaus to ensure maximum possible accuracy
  • Common errors include accounts belonging to others, incorrect balances, and duplicate entries
  • Credit bureaus must investigate disputes within 30 days
  • Willful FCRA violations allow statutory damages of $100-$1,000 plus punitive damages
  • Both credit bureaus and information furnishers can be sued for violations

Credit report errors affect millions of Americans, leading to denied loans, higher interest rates, and employment rejections. Understanding your rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act helps consumers correct errors and hold violators accountable. The consumer rights attorneys at Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman, P.C. have extensive experience prosecuting FCRA cases and forcing credit bureaus to correct errors.

Understanding the Fair Credit Reporting Act

The FCRA requires consumer reporting agencies to follow reasonable procedures to ensure maximum possible accuracy of credit reports. When consumers dispute information, bureaus must conduct reasonable investigations and correct or delete inaccurate information.

Common Credit Report Errors

Frequently observed errors include accounts belonging to other people with similar names, incorrect account statuses showing open accounts as closed, wrong payment histories including false late payments, duplicate reporting of the same account, and accounts remaining after identity theft.

How to Dispute Credit Report Mistakes

Review your credit reports from all three bureaus—Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion—through AnnualCreditReport.com. Submit written disputes identifying each error with supporting documentation. Keep copies of all correspondence.

Reasonable Investigation Requirements

Credit bureaus must complete investigations within 30 days of receiving disputes (45 days if you provide additional information). Investigations must be reasonable—simply parroting back information from furnishers without actual investigation violates the FCRA.

Damages for FCRA Violations

Negligent violations allow recovery of actual damages, attorney’s fees, and costs. Willful violations add statutory damages between $100 and $1,000 per violation plus potential punitive damages. When credit bureaus repeatedly fail to investigate properly, damages multiply.

When Credit Bureaus and Furnishers Are Liable

Both credit bureaus and information furnishers (creditors reporting to bureaus) can be held liable for FCRA violations. Furnishers must investigate disputes forwarded by bureaus and report accurate information. Continuing to report information known to be false violates federal law.

Conclusion: Take Control of Your Credit Report

Your credit report affects nearly every aspect of your financial life—from getting a mortgage to landing a job. When credit bureaus allow errors to remain on your report despite your disputes, they violate federal law and cause real harm to your financial wellbeing. You have the right to demand accuracy and accountability.

Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman, P.C. has successfully sued all three major credit bureaus for FCRA violations, forcing them to correct errors and compensating consumers for damages. We understand the investigation requirements credit bureaus must follow and know how to prove they’ve failed to meet their obligations. If you’ve disputed errors on your credit report and the bureaus have failed to correct them, contact us today. We’ll fight to clean up your credit report and recover damages for the violations. Call now for a free case review.

Quick Navigation

Free Consultation

Undisclosed
Settlement

TCPA class action against the Los Angeles Times. Final approval granted 2014.

More Details
$750,000
Settlement

Common fund class-wide TCPA settlement against home healthcare provider. Final approval granted.

More Details
$27.6M
Settlement

TCPA class action certified on behalf of approximately 2,000,000 class members under Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3). Subsequently settled on a Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3) basis. Final approval granted.

More Details
$5.2M
Settlement

/

Unruh Act class action on behalf of approximately 240,000 consumers challenging Tinder’s age-based differential pricing for its subscription service. Final approval granted; subsequently went up on appeal.

More Details
$390,000
Settlement

TCPA class action alleging HD Supply sent unauthorized marketing text messages to consumers’ mobile phones without consent between October 21, 2011 and July 26, 2017. Presided over by Judge Fernando M. Olguin. Case terminated January 29, 2018.

More Details
$1,500,000
Settlement

/

TCPA class action against a Kansas-based payday lender alleged to have contacted consumers via prerecorded calls on their cell phones to collect alleged debts without consent. California federal judge granted final approval.

More Details
$6,500,000
Settlement

/

Cal. Penal Code § 632.7 class action certified by contested motion under Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3) on behalf of over 40,000 class members whose calls were recorded without their knowledge or consent. Final approval granted.

More Details
$13,000,000
Settlement

/

$13 Million Class action alleging HSBC recorded consumer telephone calls without knowledge or consent in violation of California’s Privacy Statute (Penal Code § 632.7). California Federal Judge granted final approval.

More Details
$34,000,000
Settlement

/

One of the largest TCPA class action settlements in U.S. history at time of approval. Alleged Chase used an automatic telephone dialing system to contact consumers on their cell phones without prior express consent from July 2008 through December 2013. Settlement class included over 32 million members. Final approval granted March 2016.

More Details
$150,000,000
Settlement

/

Class action on behalf of over 100,000 owners of GM vehicles equipped with allegedly defective LG-manufactured batteries posing fire and safety risks. Litigation commenced December 2020. U.S. District Judge Terrence G. Berg indicated preliminary approval of the $150 million settlement.

More Details
$100,000,000
Settlement

/ /

Landmark gig-economy class action. DoorDash drivers in California and Massachusetts alleged they were wrongly classified as independent contractors rather than employees. Firm served as class counsel. Final approval granted January 13, 2022 — the largest gig-economy worker class settlement in U.S. history at the time.

More Details

Office Locations

Copyright 2025 Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman, P.C. All Rights Reserved.