The U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit and Second Circuit recently issued Fair Credit Reporting Act decisions within weeks of each other. The former's decision has received negative reaction from the consumer bar, and is largely viewed by it as giving creditors broad immunity to disregard their investigation obligations under the FCRA when identity theft victims dispute fraudulent accounts and charges. The latter circuit court decision clarified what kinds of inaccuracies are actionable under the FCRA. Both decisions will reverberate within the FCRA bar for the foreseeable future, causing strategy shifts and perhaps forming the basis of future cert petitions to the U.S. Supreme Court.

• The Eleventh Circuit rules the FCRA prohibits unreasonable investigations, not unreasonable conclusions emerging from investigations.

Milgram v. Chase Bank, No. 22-1025 (11th. Cir. Jun. 8, 2023), concerned Shelly Milgram, the owner and operator of an interior design business in Florida. In 2013, she hired a new office manager, Jean Williams. Milgram did not authorize Williams to handle the company's credit cards, make payments on them, or access its bank accounts. Milgram kept the account names and passwords for her bank accounts in an unlocked file cabinet in her office, which she instructed Williams not to open.

Williams later opened three credit cards in Milgram's name without her knowledge or permission, including a Chase personal credit card. Williams set up the Chase card for Milgram to be the owner while Williams was an authorized user. For two years, Williams used these three cards, plus the company's Chase business card, for personal purchases, making payments on the cards from the company's checking accounts.