SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG, District Judge.
Whereas, plaintiff filed his complaint on September 4, 2013, alleging that defendant FedLoan Servicing and Trans Union LLC violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act;
Whereas, on October 15, 2013, FedLoan Servicing filed an answer to the complaint in which it stated that FedLoan Servicing is fictitious business statement of the Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency, which is a statutorily-created instrumentality of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (PHEAA);
Whereas, plaintiff seeks leave to file his First Amended Complaint, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit "A," which will substitute PHEAA as the defendant in the place of FedLoan Servicing;
Whereas, the First Amended Complaint includes no new allegations against Trans Union LLC;
Whereas, plaintiff agrees that Trans Union LLC is not required to respond to the First Amended Complaint and that Trans Union LLC's Answer to Plaintiff's Complaint and Affirmative Defenses [Doc No.15] shall be deemed its response to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint;
Whereas, plaintiff agrees that any new allegations in Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint that could be read as being directed against Trans Union LLC shall be deemed denied:
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between counsel that plaintiff may have leave to file his First Amended Complaint, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit "A."
Based upon the parties' stipulation and for good cause shown, plaintiff is granted leave to file his First Amended Complaint, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit "A."
1. This is an action for damages by plaintiff Juan L. Solis against Trans Union, LLC and the Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency, a Pennsylvania corporation dba FedLoan Servicing for violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 USC § 1681 et seq. (FCRA) and the California Credit Reporting Agencies Act (CCRAA), Civil Code § 1785.25(a).
2. Plaintiff Juan L. Solis is a resident of Emeryville, California.
3. Defendant Trans Union, LLC ("TU") is a limited liability company that regularly conducts business in this district and is a national credit reporting agency the activities of which are subject to the terms of the FCRA.
4. Defendant Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency is a is a statutorily-created instrumentality of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania dba FedLoan Servicing with its principal place of business in Harrisburg, PA ("FLS"). FLS was established by the Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency to support the U.S. Department of Education's ability to service student loans owned by the federal government. According to its website, FLS is one of a limited number of organizations approved by the U.S. Department of Education to service these loans and it is dedicated to supporting borrowers with easy and convenient ways to manage their student loans.
5. The court has federal question jurisdiction over the FCRA claims pursuant to 15 USC § 1681p and supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims pursuant to 15 USC § 1367.
6. The defendants do business in this district.
7. Defendant Trans Union LLC has mixed plaintiff Juan L. Solis' credit files with those of his father and mother, whose names are Jorge Solis and Juanita Solis. The accounts that are mixed are student loans serviced by defendant FLS.
8. Plaintiffs' parents filed a Chapter 7 bankruptcy proceeding on May 4, 2012, in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in the Eastern District of Michigan. Their petition listed two FLS accounts, represented student loans as to which plaintiff's parents had co-signed.
9. Plaintiff has never filed a bankruptcy proceeding.
10. Beginning on May 31, 2012, and continuing to date, defendant FLS has been reporting to Trans Union LLC that plaintiff filed a Chapter 7 bankruptcy on nine (9) FLS student loans. Plaintiff took out the loans in amounts that varied from $1,750 to $12,000 in the period June 2008 to August 2009.
11. Trans Union LLC's reporting on plaintiff's accounts is ridiculous on its face. The only accounts that Trans Union LLC is reporting are affected by a Chapter 7 bankruptcy proceeding are the nine FLS accounts. Plaintiff has many other accounts that Trans Union is reporting are not affected by a bankruptcy proceeding. Anyone the least bit conversant with the bankruptcy laws would know that when an individual files bankruptcy, all of his or her pre-petition debts are included in bankruptcy. Plus, the instances when an individual can successfully zero out students loans are extremely rare. In other words, any sensible analyst looked at plaintiff's Trans Union credit report would know the FLS accounts were being reported inaccurately.
12. Plaintiff talked by telephone with representatives of Trans Union in June 2012; on four (4) occasions on August 10, 2012; on December 3, 2012; and on August 15, 2013. During the plaintiff explained in detail that Trans Union's reporting on the FLS loans was inaccurate and that he had never filed bankruptcy.
13. Plaintiff talked by telephone with representatives of defendant FLS on August 10, 2012, November 28, 2012; and on August 15, 2013. In these conversations, plaintiff explained that its reporting to Trans Union was inaccurate. He explained he had never filed bankruptcy. The FLS said plaintiff's file included a "note" that he had filed bankruptcy. The representative said he or someone would get back to plaintiff, but to date no one has done so.
14. On August 19, 2013, plaintiff talked to a representative of Trans Union. In the conversation, plaintiff explained that its credit reporting was inaccurate. Plaintiff followed up the conversation with a letter the next day to Trans Union.
15. Plaintiff talked to a FLS representative on August 30, 2013, again explaining he had never filed a bankruptcy proceeding.
16. Plaintiff's student loans were completely paid of through a loan consolidation done by the U.S. Department of Education. Equifax and Experian reported the loans as repaid and/or refinanced on May 2013, when they were paid off by the consolidation loan. TransUnion continued to report them as discharged in bankruptcy.
17. Plaintiff applied for and was denied loans and extensions of credit based on defendants' inaccurate credit reporting.
18. As a result of defendants' conduct, plaintiff has suffered actual damages in the form of (a) lost credit opportunities, b) harm to credit reputation and credit score, and (c) emotional distress in the form of mental pain, anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, anxiety and frustration. Plaintiff will continue to suffer the same for an indefinite time in the future, all to his great detriment and loss.
19. Plaintiff incorporate by reference ¶¶ 1 through 18.
20. The Fair Credit Reporting Act provides that if the completeness or accuracy of any item of information contained in a consumer's file at a consumer reporting agency is disputed by the consumer and the consume notifies the agency directly of such dispute, the agency shall conduct a reasonable reinvestigation to determine whether the disputed information is inaccurate, or delete the item from the file within 30 days of receiving the consumer's dispute notice. 15 USC § 1681i(a)(1) (A).
21. In conducting its reinvestigation of disputed information in a consumer report, the credit reporting agency is required to "review and consider all relevant information submitted by the consumer."
22. Within the two years preceding the filing of this complaint, Plaintiffs notified TU of inaccuracies contained in its reports and asked it to correct the inaccuracies.
23. Trans Union failed to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation of the inaccuracies that Plaintiffs disputed.
24. Trans Union failed to review and consider all relevant information submitted by Plaintiff.
25. Trans Union failed to employ and follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of plaintiff's credit reports, information and file in violation of 15 USC § 1681e(b).
26. As a result of the above-described violations of § 1681i and § 1681e(b), plaintiff has sustained damages.
27. Trans Union's violations of the FCRA were willful and therefore plaintiffs is therefore entitled to also seek statutory and punitive damages.
28. Plaintiff incorporates by reference ¶¶ 1-27.
29. The FCRA requires a furnisher such as FLS, after receiving notice from a credit reporting agency that a consumer disputes information that is being reported by a furnisher, to conduct an investigation with respect to the disputed information, to review all relevant information, to report the results of the investigation to the credit reporting agency, and, if the investigation reveals that the information is incomplete or inaccurate, to report those results to all other credit reporting agencies to which the furnisher has provided the inaccurate information.
30. Within the last two years, the defendant provided inaccurate and misleading information to the credit reporting agencies.
31. The defendant violated sections 1681n and 1681o by engaging in the following conduct that violates 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(b):
32. As a result of the above-described violations of § 1681s-2(b), plaintiff has been damaged.
33. Plaintiff incorporates by reference ¶¶ 1-32.
34. California Civil Code § 1785.25 (a) states that a "person shall not furnish information on a specific transaction or experience to any consumer credit reporting agency if the person knows or should know the information is incomplete or inaccurate."
35. The defendant negligently and willfully furnished information to the credit reporting agencies it knew or should have known was inaccurate.
36. The defendant failed to make corrections to the information it was furnishing to the credit reporting agencies.
37. The defendant failed to provide a notice to the credit reporting agencies that the information it was providing was disputed.
38. Based on these violations of Civil Code § 1785.25 (a), (b) & (c), plaintiff is entitled to the remedies afforded by Civil Code § 1785.31, including actual damages, attorney's fees, pain and suffering, injunctive relief, and punitive damages in an amount not less than $100 nor more than $5,000, for each violation as the Court deems proper.
WHEREFORE, plaintiff prays for judgment as follows:
1. Actual, statutory and punitive damages;
2. Injunctive relief;
3. Costs and attorney's fees; and
4. Such other relief as the Court may deem proper.
Plaintiff demands a trial by jury on all issues.
