Mcintyre v. RentGrow, Inc., 34 F.4th 87

RentGrow, a tenant-screening CRA based in Massachusetts, purchases civil court-record summaries from TransUnion Background Data Solutions (TUBDS) and applies limited filtering before producing tenant-screening reports for landlords.
Patricia McIntyre applied to rent in Philadelphia; RentGrow's report (sourced from TUBDS) omitted that a complaint had been withdrawn in one case and failed to reflect a satisfied judgment in another, and the property manager rejected her application.
McIntyre disputed the report; RentGrow notified TUBDS and updated the report within a month, but she remained ineligible and sued under the FCRA (15 U.S.C. § 1681e(b)), alleging negligent and willful noncompliance.
At summary judgment the district court found triable issues on accuracy and reasonableness of procedures but concluded McIntyre failed to show willfulness (recklessness), granting RentGrow summary judgment and denying class certification.
On appeal the First Circuit affirmed: a jury could find inaccuracies and disputed the reasonableness of RentGrow’s procedures, but the CFPB Supervisory Highlights cited by McIntyre did not provide clear notice that RentGrow’s practices were recklessly unlawful.
The court emphasized that willfulness under the FCRA requires knowing or reckless conduct, and that reliance on an ambiguous or non-authoritative source (or general supervisory guidance) will not, by itself, establish recklessness.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the tenant-screening report contained material inaccuracies	McIntyre: omissions (withdrawn complaint, satisfied judgment) rendered report materially misleading	RentGrow: report accurately showed prior landlord disputes; omissions are not materially misleading	Court: triable issue for jury — inaccuracies could be found
Whether RentGrow followed reasonable procedures under §1681e(b)	McIntyre: RentGrow blindly relied on TUBDS and lacked verification/audits	RentGrow: selected best vendor after testing, filtered results, and corrected disputes promptly	Court: triable factual dispute — jury could find procedures unreasonable
Whether RentGrow acted willfully (recklessly) under §1681n	McIntyre: CFPB Supervisory Highlights and dispute rates should have put RentGrow on clear notice of high risk	RentGrow: CFPB Highlights are not authoritative and did not put it on clear notice; its steps were reasonable	Court: no reasonable jury could find recklessness based on the CFPB publication; summary judgment affirmed
Whether class certification should stand after summary judgment on merits	McIntyre: sought class of persons with similar omissions in reports	RentGrow: merits failure defeats class certification	Court: denial of class certification affirmed as outcome depended on merits (summary judgment outcome)

Safeco Ins. Co. of Am. v. Burr, 551 U.S. 47 (2007) (willfulness includes reckless conduct; an objectively unreasonable legal interpretation can show recklessness)
DeAndrade v. Trans Union LLC, 523 F.3d 61 (1st Cir. 2008) (plaintiff must show material inaccuracy for §1681e(b) claims)
Cortez v. Trans Union, LLC, 617 F.3d 688 (3d Cir. 2010) (a CRA may act recklessly by adopting an objectively unreasonable interpretation or policy)
Birmingham v. Experian Info. Sols., Inc., 633 F.3d 1006 (10th Cir. 2011) (willful violation requires knowing or reckless noncompliance)
TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, 141 S. Ct. 2190 (2021) (actual-injury requirement for certain remedies; standing considerations noted)
Consumer Data Indus. Ass'n v. Frey, 26 F.4th 1 (1st Cir. 2022) (context on importance of consumer credit reports)
Bennett v. Saint-Gobain Corp., 507 F.3d 23 (1st Cir. 2007) (summary judgment standard and burden on nonmovant)