Complaint Against Credit Agencies and Banks for Mixing Consumer’s Credit Files

October 11th, 2010 by krista


IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

Jane Doe, Plaintiff v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc. and Equifax Information Services, LLC and DELL Financial Services, a/k/a CIT Bank/DFS and World Financial Network National Bank, d/b/a Express

 

 

                                                                              Complaint

I.     Preliminary Statement

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

 

II.     Jurisdiction and Venue

2.         Jurisdiction of this Court arises under 15 U.S.C. § 1681p, 28 U.S.C. §1331, 1337, and supplemental jurisdiction exists for the state law claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1367.

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

III.     Parties

4.                  Plaintiff, Jane Doe, is an individual who resides in CA 92101. At all times material hereto, Plaintiff resided at 7124 Heather Drive, Princeton Junction, NJ 08550.

5.                  Defendant Experian Information Solutions, Inc. (hereafter “Experian”) is a business entity that regularly conducts business in the State of New Jersey, and which has a principal place of business located at 5 Century Drive, Parsippany, New Jersey 07054.

6.         Defendant Equifax Information Services LLC (hereafter “EIS”) is a business entity which regularly conducts business in the State of New Jersey, and which has a principal place of business located at 6 Clementon Road, East, Suite A2, Gibbsboro, New Jersey 08026.

7.         Defendant, Dell Financial Services a/k/a CIT Bank/DFS (hereafter “DFS”) is a business entity which regularly conducts business in the State of New Jersey, and which has a principal place of business located at 12234 N IH 35 SB Bldg B, Austin, TX 78754.

8.         Defendant World Financial Network National Bank d/b/a Express (hereafter “WFNNB”) is a business entity which regularly conducts business in the State of New Jersey, and which has a principal place of business located at 3100 Easton Square Place, Columbus, OH 43219.

 

 

IV.       Factual Allegations

9.                  Defendants have been reporting derogatory and inaccurate statements and credit information relating to Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s credit history to third parties including through at least 2010 (hereafter the “inaccurate information”).

10.              The inaccurate information includes accounts with American Express, AT&T Mobility, Capital One, Chase/Circuit City, Chase Bank, Citi Bank/CBSD, Collection Company of America, COMED #26409, DSNB/Macys, First Premier, GEMB/Gap, LVNV Funding, LLC, Sears Premier Card, WFNNB/Express and personal information.

11.              The inaccurate information is believed to belong to Plaintiff’s brother

12.              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.

13.              Defendants Experian and EIS have been reporting the inaccurate information through the issuance of false and inaccurate credit information and consumer credit reports that they have disseminated to various persons and credit grantors, both known and unknown, through 2010.

14.              Plaintiff has disputed the inaccurate information with Experian and EIS by following Experian and EIS’s established procedures for disputing consumer credit information, several times in 2008 and 2009.

15.              Notwithstanding Plaintiff’s efforts, Experian and EIS have sent Plaintiff correspondence indicating their intent to continue publishing the inaccurate information and Experian and EIS continues to publish and disseminate such inaccurate information to other third parties through the present.

16.              Despite Plaintiff’s efforts, Experian and EIS have never: (1) contacted Plaintiff to follow up on, verify and/or elicit more specific information about Plaintiff’s disputes; (2) contacted any non-furnisher third parties that would have relevant information concerning Plaintiff’s disputes, or (3) forwarded any relevant information concerning Plaintiff’s disputes to the entities originally furnishing the inaccurate information.

17.              Additionally, Plaintiff has repeatedly disputed the inaccurate information concerning the American Express, AT&T Mobility, Capital One, Chase/Circuit City, Chase Bank, Citi Bank/CBSD, Collection Company of America, COMED #26409,DSNB/Macys, First Premier, GEMB/Gap, LVNV Funding, LLC, Sears Premier Card, WFNNB/Express  have failed to correct their records after being put on notice of Plaintiff’s disputes through credit reporting agencies.

18.              In April and May 2009, Defendants Dell and WFNNB were contacted for the first time by the relevant credit reporting agencies through the established procedure for disputing consumer credit information concerning disputes that Plaintiff lodged with the credit reporting agencies at that time.  Upon such a contact concerning Plaintiff’s disputes through the credit reporting agencies Defendants Dell and WFNNB were required to conduct a reasonable investigation per FCRA § 1681s-2(b) and delete the inaccurate credit information that they were reporting as to Plaintiff on his credit reports.  Nevertheless these Defendants willfully continued to report such inaccurate information to various credit reporting agencies, and have even failed to mark the above accounts and inaccurate information as “disputed by the consumer.”

19.              Despite Plaintiff’s exhaustive efforts to date, Defendants have nonetheless deliberately, willfully, intentionally, recklessly and negligently repeatedly failed to perform reasonable investigations of the above disputes as required by the FCRA and have failed to remove the inaccurate information.

20.              Plaintiff has been denied various extensions of consumer credit and Plaintiff has been informed that the basis for these denials was the inaccurate information that appears on Plaintiff’s credit reports, which was a substantial factor for those denials.

21.              Plaintiff’s credit reports and file containing the inaccurate, derogatory Dell and WFNNB accounts have been obtained from Defendants Experian and EIS, and have been reviewed several times in 2010 by prospective and existing credit grantors and extenders of credit.

22.              As a result of Defendants’ conduct, Plaintiff has suffered actual damages in the form of credit denial or loss of credit opportunity, credit defamation and emotional distress, including anxiety, frustration, embarrassment and, humiliation.

23.              At all times pertinent hereto, Defendants were acting by and through their 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 Defendants herein.

24.              At all times pertinent hereto, the conduct of the Defendants, as well as that of their 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.        

 

V.     CLAIMS

COUNT ONE – FCRA

(Plaintiff v. Experian and EIS)

            25.       Plaintiff incorporates the foregoing paragraphs as though the same were set forth at length herein.

26.       At all times pertinent hereto, Defendants, Experian and EIS, were “persons” and “consumer reporting agencies” as those terms are defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1681a(b) and (f).

27.       At all times pertinent hereto, Plaintiff was a “consumer” as that term is defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1681a(c).

28.       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).

29.       Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §1681n and 15 U.S.C. §1681o, Defendants, Experian and EIS, are liable to the Plaintiff for willfully and negligently failing to conduct a proper and reasonable reinvestigation concerning the inaccurate information after receiving notice of the dispute from the Plaintiff, in violation of 15 U.S.C. §1681i.

30.       The conduct of Defendants Experian and EIS, 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, Defendants are liable to the Plaintiff for the full amount of statutory, actual and punitive damages, along with the attorney’s fees and the costs of litigation, as well as such further relief, as may be permitted by law.

COUNT TWO – FCRA

(Plaintiff v. Dell and WFNNB)

 

            31.       Plaintiff incorporates the foregoing paragraphs as though the same were set forth at length herein.

32.       At all times pertinent hereto, Defendants, Dell and WFNNB, were “persons” as that term defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1681a(b).

33.       Defendants, Dell and WFNNB, violated sections 1681n and 1681o of the FCRA by engaging in the following conduct:

(a)        willfully and negligently failing to conduct an investigation of the inaccurate information that Plaintiff disputed through the credit bureaus in April and May 2009;

(b)        willfully and negligently failing to report the disputed status of the inaccurate information to all credit reporting agencies through the present; and

(c)        willfully and negligently failing to comply with the requirements imposed on furnishers of information pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(b) with respect to Plaintiff’s disputes in April and May 2009.

34.       Defendants Dell and WFNNB’s conduct was a direct and proximate cause, as well as a substantial factor, in causing the serious injuries, damages and harm to the Plaintiff that are outlined more fully above, and as a result, Defendants Dell and WFNNB, are liable to compensate Plaintiff for the full amount of statutory, actual and punitive damages, along with attorneys’ fees and costs, as well as such other relief, permitted by law.

VI.     JURY TRIAL DEMAND

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

VII.     PRAYER FOR RELIEF

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

(a)        Actual damages;

(b)        Statutory damages;

(c)        Punitive damages;

(d)               Costs and reasonable attorney’s fees pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §§1681n, and 1681o; and

(f)    Such other and further relief as may be necessary, just and proper.

DESIGNATION OF TRIAL COUNSEL

Plaintiff hereby designates John Soumilas as trial counsel in the above-captioned matter.  Plaintiff reserves the right to amend this designation as necessary.

ARBITRATION CERTIFICATION

I, Mark D. Mailman, counsel of record do hereby certify pursuant to Local Civil Rule 201.1(d) that relief other than monetary damages is sought and that the damages sought are in excess of $150,000.  I further certify that, to my knowledge, the within case is not the subject of any action, arbitration or administrative hearing now pending in any court.

Respectfully submitted,

 

FRANCIS & MAILMAN, P.C.

 

BY:        /s/ Mark D. Mailman                       

MARK D. MAILMAN

JOHN SOUMILAS

GEOFFREY H. BASKERVILLE

Land Title Building, 19th Floor

100 South Broad Street

Philadelphia, PA 19110

(215) 735-8600

Dated: October 1, 2010                                  Attorneys for Plaintiff

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.