STIPULATION TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT
[FIRST REQUEST]
CAM FERENBACH, Magistrate Judge.
This Stipulation is filed pursuant to LR IA 6-1 and LR IA 6-2. This FCRA action was filed July 23, 2018. On December 17, 2018 this Honorable Court adopted the parties joint stipulation to extend the discovery deadline through June 3, 2019 [#15].
The parties now stipulate to the filing of the attached Amended Complaint. The revisions are in paragraphs 1 and 2 and simply reflect the deletion of all language pertaining to purported state law claims.
The purpose of this Stipulation and intended filing is to impart to Court and Counsel Plaintiff is not pursuing any state law claim.
IT IS SO ORDERED:
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff must file the Amended Complaint on or before March 8, 2019.
JURY DEMANDED
AMENDED COMPLAINT
JURISDICTION
1. The jurisdiction of this Court attains pursuant to the FCRA, 15 U.S.C. Section 1681(p). Venue lies in the Southern Division of the Judicial District of Nevada as Plaintiff's claims arose from acts of the Defendant perpetrated therein.
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
2. The Plaintiff brings this action for damages based upon Defendant's violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq. (hereinafter referred to as "FCRA").
3. Plaintiff is a natural person and is a resident and citizen of the State of Nevada and of the United States. Plaintiff is a "consumer" as defined by § 1681 a(c) of the FCRA.
4. The Defendant Trans Union LLC (TUC) is a corporate entity licensed to do business in the State of Nevada.
5. TUC is a consumer reporting agency, as defined in § 1681(t) of the FCRA, regularly engaged in the business of assembling, evaluating, and dispersing information concerning consumers for the purpose of furnishing consumer reports, as defined in § 1681 a(d) of the FCRA, to third parties.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
6. Plaintiff's credit worthiness has been repeatedly compromised by the acts, obduracy and general indifference of the Defendant.
7. For many years Plaintiff has mixed Plaintiff's credit information with that of another consumer.
8. Neither of Defendant's competitors, Equifax nor Experian, has at all mixed Plaintiff's information.
9. Plaintiff is Jorge Roberto Hernandez, Jr., born May, 1957.
10. Plaintiff is not, and has never gone by, Jorge Trujillo Hernandez (Trujillo).
11. Trujillo was apparently born in 1982.
12. On August 22, 2015 Defendant sent Plaintiff a credit profile ascribed to Trujillo (Exhibit 1).
13. In Exhibit 1 Defendant mixed Trujillo's credit information with Plaintiff's.
14. Exhibit 1 reflects the 1982 date of birth.
15. On July 13, 2016 Defendant provided Plaintiff two (2) credit profiles (Exhibits 2 and 3).
16. The two files again mixed Plaintiff's information with that of the unknown Trujillo.
17. On November 15, 2016 Defendant again provided Plaintiff mixed erroneous files (Exhibits 4 and 5).
18. On December 20, 2016 Plaintiff sent Defendant a detailed dispute (Exhibit 6).
19. Plaintiff made a precise point of identifying himself versus Trujillo and conveyed "you have wrongly mixed my credit profiles with someone else's."
20. In Exhibit 6, Plaintiff provided his full Social Security number, his May, 1957 date of birth, Driver License and recent utility bill.
21. Plaintiff additionally disputed two (2) adverse, erroneous Bayview Loan Servicing (BLS) accounts.
22. In Exhibit 6 Plaintiff imparted BLS serially misapplied his timely payments.
23. Defendant responded January 19, 2017 (Exhibits 7 and 8).
24. In Exhibit 7 Defendant again erroneously ascribed Trujillo's identity and purported 1982 date of birth.
25. In Exhibit 8 Defendant "verified" the two erroneous BLS accounts despite every payment was timely made.
26. On September 13, 2017 BLS itself instructed Defendant to delete its erroneous accounts (Exhibits 9 and 10).
27. Notwithstanding all the foregoing, on September 27, 2017 Defendant again mixed Trujillo's credit information with Plaintiff's (Exhibits 11 and 12).
28. And again on June 25, 2018 (Exhibits 13 and 14).
29. Plaintiff previously disputed erroneous identifying information Defendant reported.
30. Exhibits 13 and 14 contain erroneous addresses and telephone numbers.
31. For example, Defendant reports an erroneous Wilmington, Delaware address.
32. Plaintiff has never resided in Delaware.
33. Defendant also reports an erroneous North Carolina telephone number.
34. Plaintiff has likewise neither lived in North Carolina nor had a North Carolina telephone number.
35. Defendant parroted previously reported information notwithstanding documentation strongly revealing the highly unreliable nature of the information. Cushman v. Trans Union Corp., 115 F.3d 220, 225 (3rd Cir. 1997).
36. In failing to correct Plaintiff's report, Defendant continued to report patently inaccurate information in violation of the FCRA. Drew v. Equifax Information Services, LLC, 690 F.3d 1100, 1108 (9th Cir. 2012).
37. In failing to appropriately revise Plaintiff's report, Defendant provided misleading information which likewise violated the FCRA, Drew v. Equifax Information Services, LLC, 690 F.3d 1100, 1108 (9th Cir. 2012).
38. Defendant was precluded from making any report either patently wrong or "missing crucial data" or otherwise misleading. Kuns v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, 611 Fed.Appx. 398 (U.S. Ct. of Appeals, Ninth Circuit 2015).
39. Defendant violated the FCRA in its failure to provide additional information explicating the status of Plaintiff's account. Bush v. Roundpoint Mortg. Servicing Corp., 122 F.Supp.3d 1347 (M.D.Fl. 2015).
40. Plaintiff has suffered meaningful emotional distress including, but not limited to, excessive worry, frustration, sleeplessness, anger, humiliation, embarrassment, chagrin and other mental anguish as a direct result of Defendant's conduct. McCollough v. Johnson. Rodenburg & Lauinger, LLC, 637 F.3d 939, 957 (9th Cir. 2011).
STATEMENT OF CLAIM AS AGAINST DEFENDANT
41. In the entire course of its action, Defendant willfully and/or negligently violated the provisions of the FCRA in the following respects:
a. By willfully and/or negligently failing, in the preparation of the consumer reports concerning Plaintiff, to follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information in the reports.
b. By willfully and/or negligently failing to comport with FCRA § 1681i.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
THEREFORE. Plaintiff prays that the court grant the following relief as against Defendant:
a. actual damages;
b. punitive damages;
c. attorney's fees: and
d. costs.
MITCHELL D. GLINER. ESQ.
Nevada Bar #003419
3017 W. Charleston Blvd. #95
Las Vegas, Nevada 89102
Attorney Col. Plaintiff.
EXHIBIT 1
EXHIBIT 2
EXHIBIT 3
EXHIBIT 4
EXHIBIT 5
EXHIBIT 6
EXHIBIT 1
EXHIBIT 2
EXHIBIT 3
EXHIBIT 4
EXHIBIT 5
EXHIBIT 7
EXHIBIT 8
EXHIBIT 9
EXHIBIT 10
EXHIBIT 11
EXHIBIT 12
EXHIBIT 13
EXHIBIT 14
