California Complaint Against Experian for Mixing Credit Files and Reporting Inaccurate Information

December 12th, 2012 by krista

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

 

JANE DOEPlaintiff,vs.

 

EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC.

 

Defendant.

 

Civil Action No.                                 

Complaint

 

Demand for Jury Trial

 

Preliminary Statement

  1.  This is an action for damages brought by an individual consumer against the Defendant for violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (hereafter the “FCRA”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681 et seq.as amended.

Jurisdiction and Venue

  1.  Jurisdiction of this Court arises under 15 U.S.C. § 1681p, 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1337.
  2. Venue lies properly in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b).

Parties

  1.  Plaintiff is an adult individual who resides in Nevada.
  2.  Defendant Experian Information Solutions, Inc. (hereafter “Experian”) is a business entity that regularly conducts business in the Central District of California, and which has its headquarters and a principal place of business located at 475 Anton Boulevard, Costa Mesa, California  92626.

Factual Allegations

  1.  Defendant has been reporting derogatory and inaccurate statements and information relating to Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s credit history to third parties (hereafter the “inaccurate information”) from at least July 2012 to the present.
  2.  The inaccurate information includes, but is not limited to, accounts with American Savings Bank, American Express, Bank of America, Capital One, Central Pacific Bank, Central Pacific Homeloan, Chase Bank USA, Pier 1 Imports, Citibank, Discover Financial Services LLC, FIA Card Services, GECRB/Care Card, GE Capital/Mervyns, GMAC, M&T Bank Mortgage, Malaga Bank FSB, New Century Mortgage Corp., Ocwen Loan Servicing, Onewest Bank, Pacific Monarch Resorts, PNC Mortgage, Saxon Mortgage Services, Inc., Home Depot, Universal Card, US Bank, Wells Fargo Bank, Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Ann Taylor, Chadwicks of Boston, LA Redoute, Metro Style, Newport News, Spiegel, Victoria’s Secret, Women Within , as well as inaccurate personal identifying information.
  3.  The inaccurate information negatively reflects upon the Plaintiff, Plaintiff’s credit repayment history, Plaintiff’s financial responsibility as a debtor and Plaintiff’s credit worthiness.  The inaccurate information consists of accounts and/or tradelines that do not belong to the Plaintiff, and that actually belong to another consumer.  Due to Defendant’s faulty procedures, Defendant mixed the credit file of Plaintiff and that of another consumer with respect to the inaccurate information and other personal identifying information.
  4.  Defendant has been reporting the inaccurate information through the issuance of false and inaccurate credit information and consumer credit reports that it has disseminated to various persons and credit grantors, both known and unknown.
  5.  Plaintiff has applied for and has been denied various loans and extensions of consumer credit and the basis for these denials was the inaccurate information that appears on Plaintiff’s credit reports, which was a substantial factor for those denials.
  6.  Plaintiff’s credit reports and file have been obtained from Defendant and have been reviewed by prospective and existing credit grantors and extenders of credit, and the inaccurate information has been a substantial factor in precluding Plaintiff from receiving credit offers and opportunities, known and unknown.
  7.   As of result of Defendant’s conduct, Plaintiff has suffered actual damages in the form of lost credit opportunities, harm to credit reputation and credit score, and emotional distress, including humiliation and embarrassment.
  8.   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.
  9.  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 and state laws and the rights of the Plaintiff herein.

First Claim for Relief

Violation of FCRA

  1.  Plaintiff incorporates the foregoing paragraphs as though the same were set forth at length herein.
  2.   At all times pertinent hereto, Defendant was a “person” and “consumer reporting agency” as those terms are defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1681a(b) and (f).
  3.  At all times pertinent hereto, the Plaintiff was a “consumer” as that term is defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1681a(c).
  4.  At all times pertinent hereto, the above-mentioned credit reports were “consumer reports” as that term is defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1681a(d).
  5. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1681n and 15 U.S.C. § 1681o, Defendant is liable to the Plaintiff for willfully and negligently failing to employ and follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of Plaintiff’s credit report, information and file, in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1681e(b).
  6.  The conduct of Defendant was a direct and proximate cause, as well as a substantial factor, in bringing about the serious injuries, actual damages and harm to the Plaintiff that are outlined more fully above and, as a result, Defendant is liable to the Plaintiff for the full amount of statutory, actual and punitive damages, along with the attorneys’ fees and the costs of litigation, as well as such further relief, as may be permitted by law.

Jury Trial Demand

  1. Plaintiff demands trial by jury on all issues so triable.

Prayer for Relief

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff seeks judgment in Plaintiff’s favor and damages against the Defendant, based on the following requested relief:

  1.  Actual damages;
  2.  Statutory damages;
  3.  Punitive damages;
  4.  Costs and reasonable attorney’s fees pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681n and  1681o; and
  5.  Such other and further relief as may be necessary, just and proper.

Respectfully submitted,

___________________

Stephanie R. Tatar

The Tatar Law Firm

3500 West Olive Avenue

Suite 300

Burbank, CA 91505

Telephone: (323) 744-1146

Facsimile: (888) 778-5695


One Response

  1. Hi! I’m at work surfing around your blog from my new iphone 4!
    Just wanted to say I love reading your blog and look forward to all your posts!

    Carry on the great work!

    My web-site: bankruptcy lawyer Colorado

Share your experience or comments

Francis & Mailman, P.C. is not responsible for the creation or development of the below comments and does not endorse the views or opinions expressed therein.