The Arkansas Court of Appeals Follows the District of Columbia: Shifting the Burden of Proof to Cardholder to Disprove Charges Violates the Fair Credit Billing Act
In Danner v. Discover Bank, No. CA06-1052, the Arkansas Court of Appeals adopted the reasoning of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, and held that the trial court impermissibly required a defendant to prove that certain charges on a Discover account belonged to her, in violation of the Fair Credit Billing Act, 15 U.S.C. 1666.
Discover sued the defendant on the basis that appellant was past due on her account; she "defended by admitting that she had had Discover credit cards in the past, but that she thought she had paid them off and was surprised to have received a demand for payment of the sum sought."
As the defendant, Danner elected to hold Discover to its burden of proof at trial:
She did not expressly deny that the card and charges were hers, but simply stated that she had no recollection and put appellee to its proof. The trial court found in favor of appellee on the basis of its findings that appellant “did not say without question that these were not her charges,” and that payments had been made on the account.
The Court of Appeals agreed with the defendant/appellant that requiring her to prove that the charges were not hers violated the Fair Credit Billing Act, which "places upon the card issuer the burden of proving that any disputed use made of the card was authorized."
In this holding the Court of Appeals approved of the reasoning of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, which issued a similar holding in Crestar Bank v. Cheevers, 744 A.2d 1043 (D.C. 2000).
