AG Frosh Backs Consumer Rights To Challenge Flawed Data

Maryland joins Supreme Court argument in support of Virginia man suing data broker for errors

Baltimore, MD - Attorney General Brian E. Frosh today joined a U.S. Supreme Court brief arguing that consumers suffer when data-mining companies collect and disseminate inaccurate personal information that is used to make decisions about credit, housing, insurance or employment.

Attorney General Frosh is supporting the case of Thomas Robins of Virginia, who is pursuing a lawsuit against the data-collecting search engine Spokeo, Inc. Mr. Robins claims that errors in his profile could be used against him by employers, banks and other companies that use Internet searches to do business.

"It is my job as Attorney General to help protect consumers when inaccurate data is disseminated to companies that then make important decisions based on erroneous facts," Attorney General Frosh said. "Companies that scour the Internet and collect and sell data bear responsibility for ensuring that the information is accurate."

Maryland is one of 13 states and the District of Columbia which filed a "friend of the court" brief today, seeking to apply the Fair Credit Reporting Act to Spokeo.

As explained in the brief, data brokers such as Spokeo collect information from mobile devices, website traffic and purchasing habits, among other sources. They then compile individualized profiles, which are marketed and sold to businesses as purportedly accurate predictors of a consumer behavior, including whether the consumer is a good credit or insurance risk, tenant, or employee.

Erroneous personal information in a data profile can harm consumers, but the consequences can be difficult to detect because consumers are often unaware when their data is disseminated, how it is used, or by whom, the brief argues. Mr. Robins, the plaintiff, claims that his job prospects soured because of false information.

The Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), enacted by Congress in 1970, gives consumers the right to pursue relief for injuries that result when consumer reporting agencies willfully violate the FCRA by disseminating inaccurate personal data about them without first following reasonable procedures to ensure the maximum possible accuracy of the information. The brief asserts that consumers must have the ability to redress these injuries that can be hard to identity or quantify, and that private enforcement of the FCRA is needed to complement the role of attorneys general in protecting consumers.

Even the most highly regulated consumer data profiles - credit reports - contain errors. According to a 2012 study by the FTC, approximately 25 percent of consumers encountered one or more errors in at least one of the credit reports issued by the three national credit reporting agencies (TransUnion, Experian, and Equifax).

Other states that signed on to the amicus brief, drafted by Massachusetts, are Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Minnesota, Mississippi, New Mexico, New York, Oregon and Washington.