Procedural Posture
Plaintiff consumers sought review of an order granting summary adjudication and a final judgment in favor of defendant credit reporting agency on causes of action pursuant to the Consumer Credit Reporting Agencies Act (CCRAA), Civ. Code, § 1785.1 et seq.; the Unfair Competition Law (UCL), Bus. & Prof. Code, § 17200 et seq.; and the Investigative Consumer Reporting Agencies Act (ICRAA), Civ. Code, § 1786 et seq., arising from incomplete reports.
Overview: detrimental reliance elements
The credit reporting agency provided incomplete tenant screening reports that correctly showed the filing of unlawful detainer actions but did not show their dismissal. The consumers alleged that the incomplete reports had caused their rental applications to be rejected. The summary adjudication evidence showed that the property managers would have rejected the applications even if the tenant screening reports had been complete. The court held that the credit reporting agency was entitled to summary adjudication on the CCRAA and UCL causes of action because the consumers suffered no damage from the incomplete reports. Civ. Code, § 1785.31, subd. (a), required a showing of actual damages to recover under the CCRAA, even when a consumer sought injunctive relief under § 1785.31, subd. (b), or punitive damages under § 1785.31, subd. (c). Punitive damages could not be recovered without actual damages, as provided in Civ. Code, § 3294, subd. (a). Standing to maintain a UCL claim was restricted under Bus. & Prof. Code, § 17204, to persons who had suffered injury in fact. The ICRAA was unconstitutionally vague as applied to tenant screening reports containing unlawful detainer information.
Outcome
The court affirmed the trial court’s judgment and dismissed the appeal from the order granting summary adjudication.
Hercampus Fashion 