Today, the Third Circuit distinguished a recent Supreme Court decision in reversing a summary judgment against borrowers under the Fair Credit Reporting Act. The court held that a mortgage insurer must send a borrower an "adverse action" notice if it relies on the borrower’s credit report in charging more than its lowest premium. The court rejected Radian Guaranty’s arguments that it provided insurance only to the lender (instead of the borrowers, who paid the premiums), that it based the premium rate on the lender’s scoring of the borrowers’ creditworthiness (and therefore not on the borrowers’ credit report itself), and that it didn’t "willfully" misbehave. Whitfield v. Radian Guaranty, Inc., No. 05-5017 (3d Cir. Aug. 30, 2007) (distinguishing Safeco Ins. Co. v. Burr, 127 S. Ct. 2201 (2007)).
Blawgletter apologizes for the title. We couldn’t resist.
Barry Barnett
