On Friday, after reviewing Plaintiff’s credit reports which were ordered by the Court last month, the Honorable Laurie J. Michelson, dismissed Plaintiff’s claims against Michigan First, concluding there was no inaccurate or misleading reporting. (See Rider v. Equifax Info. Servs. LLC, No. 2:19-cv-13660, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99265, at *2 (E.D. Mich. June 5, 2020.)) Plaintiff had alleged that Michigan First negligently failed to conduct a proper investigation of her dispute as required by 15 USC 1681s-2(b), and that it had “willfully failed to conduct a proper reinvestigation of [her] dispute.”

HOWEVER, both of Plaintiff’s disputed credit reports indicated Plaintiff’s Michigan First account as having a “zero balance” and also included the closing date for her account. Take as a whole, neither of the tradelines would be considered misleading, ruled the Court. And the Court went on to further state “Michigan First is not the consumer reporting agency—it reports to the consumer reporting agency. So Michigan First does not control how the data it provides is presented.” Just because there is a tradeline reflecting a closed account on a credit report (within the statutorily permitted reporting period) does not mean that the credit report is inaccurate, it is the information contained within the tradeline that determines the accuracy-and after reviewing that very information in the disputed tradeline in the aforementioned case, the Court dismissed Plaintiff’s allegations as insufficient.