account. To-liver does not argue that Experian failed to fulfill the various timing and procedural requirements regarding a reinvestigation, only that the procedures it used were not reasonabl hether the credit reporting agency has a duty to go beyond its original source of information will depend on factors such as whether the consumer has alerted the reporting agency to the possibility that the source may be unreliable and the cost of verifying the accuracy of the source versus the possible harm inaccurately reported information may cause the consumer. Cushman, 115 F.3d at 225; Henson, 29 F.3d at 287. The Fifth Circuit has similarly held that CRAs may sometimes have a duty to go beyond a creditor’s response to a disputed item in limited circumstances. See Stevenson, 987 F.2d at 293 (<HOLDING>); Pinner, 805 F.2d at 1262 (holding that it was
holding that it was unreasonable for the defendant cra to rely solely on cdvs in its reinvestigation given the complexity of the consumers dispute holding that the trial court may consider documents submitted by the defendant on a motion to dismiss solely for a nonhearsay purpose and therefore may not rely on factual assertions in the documents for the truth of the matter asserted holding that it was not wrong for the administrator to rely on the findings of an independent reviewing physician holding that the state as well as the defendant has a right to rely on compliance with rule 16 holding that when there was no surprise and no prejudice defendant was entitled to rely on defense of accord and satisfaction in its summary judgment motion even though it was not included in the pleadings