The Oneida Tribe of Wisconsin was hit with a Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act (FACTA), after allegedly failing to execute proper truncation on a man’s credit card receipt, but the lawsuit was tossed by a federal judge who said that the tribe is immune to federal law.
The Seventh Circuit court is now being called to revive this proposed FACTA class action, because the tribe is not protected by sovereign immunity.
Plaintiff Jeremy M. argued against U.S. District Judge William C. Griesbach’s ruling that the tribe was immune to the federal policy, because neither Congress nor the U.S. Supreme Court intended Native American tribes to be considered “governments” under FACTA.
Jeremy did not agree with this decision, stating that the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), does not give sovereign immunity to any government with Indian tribes included. FACTA was an amendment added to the FCRA in 2003 to help protect consumers against credit card fraud and identity theft.
Under FACTA, merchants must omit certain information from debit or credit card receipts like the expiration dates and only showing the last five numbers of the cards. By concealing this information on receipts, the consumer’s chances of identity theft and credit card fraud are greatly diminished.
Overview of FACTA Violation Allegations
Merchants who fail to act within FACTA compliance are subject to pay $100 to $1,000 per violation. This policy applies to all electronically printed customer receipts produced by cash registers, self-service kiosks, and restaurants.
Consumers have the right to file a FACTA class action lawsuit if the merchant allegedly fails to act in FACTA compliance, in either negligent or willful violation. Jeremy did exactly that by suing the Oneida tribe in April, claiming that his credit card receipts had contained more than the last five number of his card, with the expiration date exposed.
He had used his credit card to make purchases at Oneida Travel Center and two Oneida One Stop locations. The tribe initially tried to have the class action lawsuit dismissed, claiming that they were not considered “governments” under the FCRA.
Jeremy argued that no government was immune to FACTA after a 2014 ruling forced the federal government to face attorney claims that it had violated the law with receipts for Public Access to Court Electronic Records services.
Additionally, Jeremy argued that the tribes are considered governments due to the powers they are authorized to exert, such as enforcing laws, imposing taxes, and entering treaties.
Even though Judge Griesbach noted that the tribes were essentially absent from the FCRA’s legislative history, Jeremy stated that this was irrelevant to the Seventh Circuit Court.
Meyers further argued that the FCRA should be in his favor, because Judge Griesbach’s decision would undermine the efforts of Congress to protect consumers.
This FACTA Class Action Lawsuit is Jeremy Meyers v. Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wisconsin, Case No. 15-3127, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.
Free FACTA Class Action Lawsuit Investigation
If you made one or more purchases and the retailer provided you with a receipt that contained more than the last five digits of your credit or debit card number or the expiration date, you may be eligible for a free class action lawsuit investigation and to pursue compensation for these FACTA violations.
Top Class Actions is a Proud Member of the American Bar Association
LEGAL INFORMATION IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE
Top Class Actions Legal Statement
©2008 – 2015 Top Class Actions® LLC
Various Trademarks held by their respective owners
The post Oneida Tribe Not Immune to FACTA Class Action, Plaintiff Tells 7th Circuit appeared first on Top Class Actions.

No comments:
Post a Comment