Identity Theft Victim Not Bound by Arbitration Clause
On April 15, 2020, Judge George Caram Steeh ruled that an identity theft victim is not required to take her case to arbitration if she did not sign the arbitration agreement. Sharee Garry brought suit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, alleging that Credit Acceptance Corporation had damaged her credit when it posted information about a fraudulent car purchase on her credit reports. In her complaint, Ms. Garry claimed that her identity had been stolen to purchase a car and she had not signed any of the necessary papers to buy the car.
Even though Ms. Garry claimed that she had not executed any of the credit documents, Credit Acceptance Corporation asked the court to enforce the arbitration clause in the credit contract at issue. Credit Acceptance Claimed that Ms. Garry's allegations were not credible, even though she claimed to live in another state and was at work in Tennessee at the time the car was purchased in Detroit.
The court denied Credit Acceptance Corporation's request and ruled that Ms. Garry was not bound by the agreement if she did not sign it, and ordered the case to be tried immediately on the issue of whether Ms. Garry actually signed the credit agreement. You can see a copy of the order here.
TAKE AWAY: If you are an identity theft victim, you are not bound by arbitration agreements that would require you to present your claims to an abitrator who has been hand picked by the company stole your identity and ruined your credit. Call today if you need help with your identity theft. (248) 208-8864.
Practice area(s): Identity Theft