"The trial court afforded Mr. Dajani multiple opportunities to amend his complaint and plead with specificity the FCRA provisions that New South allegedly violated. On August 23, 2007, the trial court directed Mr. Dajani to submit a new motion to amend “clearly setting forth the FCRA allegations that you are referring to in your reply brief.” Instead, the proposed amended complaint referred only to the general codification of the FCRA. Considering the allegations as limited by the parties to 15 U.S.C.A. § 1681s-2, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to amend based on futility since Mr. Dajani has no private right of action against New South. The only remaining claim from Mr. Dajani’s original complaint was for negligence. As discussed above, the FCRA preempts a consumer from asserting a negligence claim against a furnisher of information." Id.