IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

JOHN J., )

and )

AMANDA N., )

and )

CHARLES E., )

and )

CLARICE J., )

and )

NANCY M., )

and )

TONYA R., )

and )

LAURA ANNE, )

and )

LORI L., )

and )

CATHERINE, )

and )

BERNARD E., )

)

on behalf of themselves and all others )

similarly situated, )

)

Plaintiffs, ) Civil Action No.

vs. )

) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

EXPERIAN INFORMATION )

SOLUTIONS, INC. )

)

Defendant. )

)

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

I.     PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

1. Defendant, a national consumer reporting agency (“CRA”), has been selling credit reports inaccurately marking Plaintiffs – and what is believed to be hundreds if not thousands of other American consumers – as “deceased,” when they are very much alive.  By reporting Plaintiffs as “deceased” Defendant is making it practically impossible for them to access loans or other credit, because “deceased” consumers have no credit scores.  Defendant’s inaccurate reports are thus harming both Plaintiffs and the businesses which purchase them but cannot use them to process credit applications or extend credit due to a lack of a credit score.  If Defendant truly believed that Plaintiffs were dead, it would not, and should not, be selling any reports about them to any third party – for Plaintiffs would not be applying for credit from the grave, and Defendant knows that identity thieves use the credit information of truly deceased persons to commit fraud.  Defendant has good reasons to know that Plaintiffs are not “deceased.”  Nevertheless, Defendant has no reasonable procedures in place to accurately report the “deceased” status of Plaintiffs or other American consumers.  Unfortunately, the reality is that such procedures would encumber its ability to profit from credit reports on the  “deceased” – reports that are either useless to both consumers and the businesses purchasing them (if the consumer is truly alive) or possible agents of identity theft and fraud (if the consumer is truly dead).  This consumer protection class action asserts that Defendant’s practice of preparing and selling reports marking consumers as “deceased,” as more fully set forth below, systemically and routinely violates the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681 – 1681x (“FCRA”), at section 1681e(a) and 1681e(b).

II.     JURISDICTION AND VENUE

2. Jurisdiction of this Court arises under 15 U.S.C. § 1681p and 28 U.S.C. § 1331.

3. Venue lies properly in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b).

III.     PARTIES

4. Plaintiff John J. is a living adult individual who resides at.

5. Plaintiff Amanda N. is a living adult individual who resides at.

6. Plaintiff Charles E. is a living adult individual who resides at.

7. Plaintiff Clarice J. is a living adult individual who resides at.

8. Plaintiff Nancy M. is a living adult individual who resides at.

9. Plaintiff Tonya R. is a living adult individual who resides at.

10. Plaintiff Laura Anne is a living adult individual who resides at.

11. Plaintiff Lori L. is a living adult individual who resides at.

12. Plaintiff Catherine is a living adult individual who resides at.

13. Plaintiff Bernard E. is a living adult individual who resides at.

14. Defendant Experian Information Solutions, Inc. (“Experian”) is a business entity that regularly conducts business in Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania, and which has a principal place of business located at 505 City Parkway West, Orange, California.

IV.     FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

A. Defendant’s Practices Concerning the Sale of Reports on the “Deceased”

15. Defendant is regulated as a “consumer reporting agency” (“CRA”) under the FCRA. 15 U.S.C. § 1681a(e).

16. Defendant sells millions of “consumer reports,” colloquially called “credit reports” (“reports”), per year, and also sells credit scores.  15 U.S.C. § 1681a(e).

17. Under the FCRA, Defendant must assure that all reports are prepared following procedures that assure “maximum possible accuracy.”   15 U.S.C. § 1681e(b).

18. Under the FCRA, Defendant must maintain reasonable procedures to assure that reports are sold only for legitimate “permissible purposes.”  15 U.S.C. §§ 1681e(a) & 1681b.

19. Defendant places a “deceased” notation or marking on reports when it is advised from any of its many data furnishing sources that a given consumer is deceased.

20. Defendant does not request or require a death certificate from any of its data sources which advises that a consumer is “deceased” before placing a “deceased” mark on that consumer’s report.

21. Defendant does not request or require any proof from any data source which advises that a consumer is “deceased” showing that the consumer is, in fact, deceased before placing a “deceased” mark on that consumer’s report.

22. Defendant does not independently verify with any source that a consumer is, in fact, deceased before placing a “deceased” mark on that consumer’s report.

23. Defendant employs no procedures which assure that a consumer with a “deceased” mark on his/her report is, in fact, deceased before placing the “deceased” mark on that consumer’s report.

24. Even in instances where other data on the face of the consumer’s report indicates that he/she is not deceased, Defendant employs no procedures which assure that a consumer with a “deceased” mark on his/her report is, in fact, deceased before placing the “deceased” mark on that consumer’s report.

25. Even in instances where the purportedly deceased consumer communicates directly with Defendant, Defendant employs no procedures which assure that a consumer with a “deceased” mark on his/her report is, in fact, deceased before placing the “deceased” mark on that consumer’s report.

26. Once a “deceased” mark is placed on a consumer’s report, Defendant will not calculate and will not provide a credit score for that consumer.

27. Nevertheless, Defendant routinely sells to third parties credit reports for persons with a “deceased” mark on their reports with no credit score, despite a request by the purchaser of the report for a credit score for that consumer.

28. Defendant’s reports with a “deceased” mark sold to third parties do not ever calculate or provide a credit score for that consumer.

29. Defendant knows that third party credit furnishers use a credit score in order to process a given credit application.

30. Defendant knows that many third party credit furnishers require a credit score in order to process a given credit application.

31. Defendant knows that consumers without credit scores are unable to secure any credit from most credit furnishers.

32. Defendant knows that consumers are turned down for credit specifically because Defendant is reporting them as “deceased” and without a credit score.

33. Defendant has been put on notice for years through consumer disputes and lawsuits that consumers are turned down for credit specifically because Defendant is reporting them as “deceased” and without a credit score.

34. Nevertheless, Defendant employs no procedures which assure that a consumer marked as “deceased” on one of Defendant’s reports is, in fact, deceased.

35. Nor does Defendant employ any procedure to limit or stop the furnishing of reports to third parties for consumers which it has marked as “deceased.”

36. Defendant charges third parties a fee for reports with a mark that a consumer is deceased (“reports on the deceased”) as it would for any other report.

37. Defendant profits from the sale of reports on the deceased.

38. Defendant knows that truly deceased consumers do not apply for credit.

39. Defendant knows that the credit information and reports of truly deceased persons are used by criminals to commit identity theft or credit fraud.

40. Defendant knows that identity theft and credit fraud are serious and widespread problems in our society.

41. Defendant warns the relatives of truly deceased consumers on its Website, experian.com, that identity theft can be committed using the credit reports and information of the deceased, and requires relatives to provide a death certificate and executorship papers, among other proofs, before accessing the deceased consumer’s credit information or report.  Defendant’s Website provides:

Q.   I have a relative that has passed away, and I believe someone is using his/her identity to  obtain credit fraudulently. What should I do?

A. The executor of the estate or the spouse should notify Experian in writing of the fraudulent activity. Please clearly explain that the person is deceased and that you suspect fraudulent activity is taking place. Be sure to include the deceased person’s full name, most recent address, date of birth and Social Security number.

In addition, please enclose a copy of the death certificate. The spouse of the deceased person may receive a credit report at their home address. To mail the credit report to the executor’s address, a copy of the executorship papers must be included with the letter.

http://www.experian.com/consumer/fraud_faqs.html#passed

42. Defendant has no similar death certificate, executorship paper, or any other proof requirements for its data sources which report a consumer as deceased or for the buyers of its reports which access the purportedly deceased consumer’s information.

43. Indeed, Defendant sells reports on the deceased to third parties without question.

44. Defendant knows that such reports contain a vast amount of personal identifying and credit account information on the supposedly deceased consumer, information that can be used in identity theft or for other fraudulent purposes.

B. The Experiences of the Representative Plaintiffs

45. Over the past two years from the filing of this action, each of the named Plaintiffs above has been marked by Defendant as “deceased” on his or her Experian report.

46. None of the Plaintiffs are deceased.

47. Defendant calculates and provides no credit score on any of the Plaintiffs, even though it sells reports about them to third parties marking them as “deceased.”

48. As a result, Defendant is making it practically impossible for Plaintiffs to obtain credit and is causing them other FCRA cognizable harm.

49. At all times pertinent hereto, Defendant was acting by and through its agents, servants and/or employees who were acting within the course and scope of their agency or employment, and under the direct supervision and control of the Defendant herein.

50. At all times pertinent hereto, the conduct of the Defendant, as well as that of its agents, servants and/or employees, was malicious, intentional, willful, reckless, and in grossly negligent disregard for federal law and the rights of the Plaintiffs herein.

V.     CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS

51. Plaintiffs bring this action on behalf of the following Class:  All persons residing in the United States and its Territories about whom Defendant sold any report in connection with an application for credit marking such person as “deceased” during the period beginning two (2) years prior to the filing of this Complaint and continuing through the date of the resolution of this case.

52. The Class is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable.  Although the precise number of Class members is known only to Defendant, Plaintiff avers upon information and belief that the Class numbers in the hundreds or thousands.

53. There are questions of law and fact common to the Class that predominate over any questions affecting only individual Class members.  The principal questions concern whether the Defendant willfully and/or negligently violated the FCRA by failing to follow reasonable procedures in preparing and selling reports with a “deceased’ mark on them.

54. Plaintiffs’ claims are typical of the claims of the Class, which all arise from the same operative facts and are based on the same legal theories.

55. Plaintiffs will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the Class.  Plaintiffs are committed to vigorously litigating this matter.  Further, Plaintiffs have secured counsel experienced in handling consumer class actions.  Neither Plaintiffs nor their counsel have any interests which might cause them not to vigorously pursue this claim.

56. This action should be maintained as a class action because the prosecution of separate actions by individual members of the Class would create a risk of inconsistent or varying adjudications with respect to individual members which would establish incompatible standards of conduct for the parties opposing the Class, as well as a risk of adjudications with respect to individual members which would as a practical matter be dispositive of the interests of other members not parties to the adjudications or substantially impair or impede their ability to protect their interests.

57. Defendant has acted or refused to act on grounds generally applicable to the Class, thereby making appropriate final injunctive relief or corresponding declaratory relief with respect to the Class as a whole.

58.

• download Christian Blake

Whether Defendant violated the FCRA can be easily determined by Defendant’s policies and a ministerial inspection of Defendant’s business records.

59. A class action is a superior method for the fair and efficient adjudication of this controversy.  Management of the Class claims is likely to present significantly fewer difficulties than those presented in many individual claims. The identities of the Class members may be derived from Defendant’s records.

VI. CAUSES OF ACTION

Count One - FCRA

60. Plaintiffs incorporate the foregoing paragraphs as though the same were set forth at length herein.

61. Pursuant to section 1681n and/or 1681o of the FCRA, Defendant is liable for violating the FCRA by engaging in the following conduct with respect to Plaintiffs and the Class:

(a)   failing to follow reasonable procedures to assure “maximum possible accuracy” of the reports it sold, in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1681e(b);

(b) failing to follow reasonable procedures to assure that reports are sold only for legitimate “permissible purposes,” in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1681e(a).

VII.     JURY TRIAL DEMAND

62. Plaintiffs demand trial by jury on all issues so triable.

VIII.     PRAYER FOR RELIEF

63. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs seek judgment in their favor and in the favor of the Class for the following:

A. A determination that this action may proceed and be maintained as a class action;

B. Statutory damages of $100 to $1,000 per Class member;

C. Actual damages;

D. Punitive damages;

E. Costs and reasonable attorney’s fees;

F. An order declaring that Defendant’s practices in preparing and/or selling reports with a deceased mark are unlawful under the FCRA;

G. An order directing Defendant to immediately cease and desist from its unlawful practices as set forth above;

H. Such other and further relief as may be necessary, just and proper.

Respectfully submitted,

FRANCIS & MAILMAN, P.C.