3 ms·

In most contexts, providing false information about someone in a way that harms them is slander or libel. I think we need to revisit whether credit reporting d

In most contexts, providing false information about someone in a way that harms them is slander or libel. I think we need to revisit whether credit reporting deserves to be exempted from that, and under what circumstances.

ryandrake 3y ago
Absolutely. We should be able to successfully sue credit rating agencies for monetary damages if they tell a lender false information about us and it causes us to not get a loan or have a higher rate than is warranted. It should not matter whether they know it’s false. The harm happens regardless of whether they were negligent or malicious.
- judge2020 3y ago
  This sets a dangerous precedent. If you won, it would apply to all defamation/libel/slander cases, not just credit reporting agencies. News agencies could be sued for saying anything about someone if it later turned out to be false. Defamation laws are already on the brink of unconstitutionality.
  - ryandrake 3y ago
    This doesn't seem like a bad thing. If I say something untrue about you, and that causes you to suffer damages, you should be able to come after you for those damages, regardless of whether I am a credit rating agency, a journalist, or a regular joe. If I said to your employer, "I'm pretty sure judge2020 is a wanted criminal," and they actually fired you over it, you should be able to successfully sue me for lost wages (or if you sued your company, they should in turn be able to go after me).
judge2020 3y ago
Actually, the way they work is "x company told me y person has <this account> with <these details>". For non-celebrities, it is only defamation if it amounts to at least negligence in verifying these facts - i.e. negligent only if they have reasonable knowledge to believe the information is false. When you report to the bureaus that an account is fraudulent, that is effectively giving them notice that the account in question is not actually yours, and by removing it from your report, it's relieving them of the liability of spreading such defaming information in the future.

ryandrake 3y ago

Absolutely. We should be able to successfully sue credit rating agencies for monetary damages if they tell a lender false information about us and it causes us to not get a loan or have a higher rate than is warranted. It should not matter whether they know it’s false. The harm happens regardless of whether they were negligent or malicious.

judge2020 3y ago
This sets a dangerous precedent. If you won, it would apply to all defamation/libel/slander cases, not just credit reporting agencies. News agencies could be sued for saying anything about someone if it later turned out to be false. Defamation laws are already on the brink of unconstitutionality.
- ryandrake 3y ago
  This doesn't seem like a bad thing. If I say something untrue about you, and that causes you to suffer damages, you should be able to come after you for those damages, regardless of whether I am a credit rating agency, a journalist, or a regular joe. If I said to your employer, "I'm pretty sure judge2020 is a wanted criminal," and they actually fired you over it, you should be able to successfully sue me for lost wages (or if you sued your company, they should in turn be able to go after me).

judge2020 3y ago

Actually, the way they work is "x company told me y person has <this account> with <these details>". For non-celebrities, it is only defamation if it amounts to at least negligence in verifying these facts - i.e. negligent only if they have reasonable knowledge to believe the information is false. When you report to the bureaus that an account is fraudulent, that is effectively giving them notice that the account in question is not actually yours, and by removing it from your report, it's relieving them of the liability of spreading such defaming information in the future.