Reference no: EM133720249

Problem 1. In 1998 a transgendered individual, Lucas Rosa, who identified as female, applied for a loan at a Massachusetts bank. When asked for identification, she presented documents with photos showing her dressed as a man. The loan officer told Rosa that she would not receive a loan application until she "went home and changed." Rosa filed an Equal Credit Opportunity Act lawsuit that was dismissed by the Massachusetts district court. WAS THE DISTRICT COURT CORRECT IN DISMISSING THIS CLAIM?

Problem 2. Plaintiff Richard Williams sued Defendant First Advantage for alleged violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act in connection with twice attributing the criminal background information of another individual to Plaintiff. In two criminal background reports developed a year apart, Defendant reported to Plaintiff's potential employers criminal background information related to a "Ricky Williams." Defendant's procedures for connecting criminal background information with individuals with common names. In order to attribute criminal background information to an individual with a similar name, Defendant's employees preparing the report were required to attempt to locate three identifiers, such as name, date of birth, Social Security number, or a driver's license number. Where the employee was unable to locate a third identifier, he or she must note that they were unable to do so and obtain approval by a supervisor prior to releasing the report. Evidence at trial showed that in both instances, Defendant's employees preparing Williams's reports relied on only two identifiers. Further, Plaintiff disputed the criminal information contained in the first report, which was later removed. However, different criminal background information related to "Ricky Williams" appeared on Plaintiff's second criminal background report developed a year later. The employees who developed the second report lacked access to information pertaining to the disputed criminal history in the first report. DID FIRST ADVANTAGE VIOLATE THE FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT?

Problem 3. Gibson bought a used car from Bob Watson Chevrolet on credit. The dealer gave her a statement captioned "Itemization of Amount Financed." The statement contains a category referred to as "Amounts Paid to Others on Your Behalf," under which appears an entry that reads: "To North American for Extended Warranty $800.00." The dealer admits that a substantial (though at present unknown) amount of the $800 was retained by him rather than paid over to the company that issued the warranty (North American). When the dealer sells a car for cash, it marks up the warranty at a lesser amount than when sold on credit. DID THE FAILURE TO DISCLOSE THAT THE DEALER RETAINED MORE OF THE CHARGED WARRANTY ON A CREDIT SALE THAN A CASH SALE VIOLATE THE TRUTH IN LENDING ACT?