Safeco Insurance Company of America, et al. v. Charles Burr, et al. (551 U.S. 47)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided June 4, 2007 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 551 U.S. 47 · 127 S. Ct. 2201
- Decided
- June 4, 2007
- Term
- October Term 2006
- Vote
- 9–0
- Majority author
- Justice Souter
- Issue area
- Economic Activity
- Disposition
- Reversed and remanded
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
Justice Souter delivered the opinion of the Court. The Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA or Act) requires notice to any consumer subjected to “adverse action . . . based in whole or in part on any information contained in a consumer [credit] report.” 15 U. S. C. § 1681m(a). Anyone who “willfully fails” to provide notice is civilly liable to the consumer. § 1681n(a). The questions in these consolidated cases are whether willful failure covers a violation committed in reckless disregard of the notice obligation, and, if so, whether petitioners Safeco and GEICO committed reckless violations. We hold that reckless action is covered, that GEICO did not violate the statute, and that while Safeco might have, it did not act recklessly. I A Congress enacted FCRA in 1970 to ensure fair and accurate credit reporting, promote efficiency in the banking system, and protect consumer privacy. See 84 Stat. 1128, 15 U. S. C. § 1681; TRW Inc. v. Andrews, 534 U. S. 19, 23 (2001). The Act requires, among other things, that “any person [who] takes any adverse action with respect to any consumer that is based in whole or in part on any information contained in a consumer report” must notify the affected consumer. 15 U. S. C. § 1681m(a). The notice must point out the adverse action, explain how to reach the agency that reported on the consumer’s credit, and tell the consumer that he can get a free…
Excerpt of a 41,197-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.