Case 1:22-cv-01066-ELR-JEM Document 1 Filed 03/16/22 Page 1 of 11
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
`ATLANTA DIVISION
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`Civil Case Number:
`
`
`CIVIL ACTION
`
`COMPLAINT
`AND
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`CHRISTIAN EVERETT,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-v-
`
`
`
`
`
`TRANSUNION, LLC, EQUIFAX
`INFORMATION SERVICES, LLC, and
`EXPERIAN INFORMATION
`SOLUTIONS, INC.,
`
`
`
`
` Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1.
`
`Plaintiff, Christian Everett, brings this action under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15
`
`U.S.C. § 1681, et seq. (the “FCRA”) alleging that the three major consumer reporting
`
`agencies, Experian
`
`Information Solutions,
`
`Inc.
`
`(Experian), TransUnion, LLC
`
`(TransUnion) and Equifax Information Services, LLC (Equifax) have negligently and
`
`recklessly disseminated false information regarding the Plaintiff’s credit.
`
`2.
`
`Plaintiff further alleges TransUnion, Equifax and Experian failed to follow reasonable
`
`procedures to ensure maximum accuracy of credit reports they prepared concerning
`
`Plaintiff, and failed to investigate credit report inaccuracies in response to Plaintiff’s
`
`disputes.
`
`3.
`
`Plaintiff seeks statutory, actual, and punitive damages, along with injunctive and
`
`declaratory relief, and attorneys’ fees and costs.
`
`
`
`JURISDICTION
`
`4. The Court has jurisdiction of this matter under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and 15 U.S.C. § 1681p.
`
`-1-
`
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
`ATLANTA DIVISION
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`Civil Case Number:
`
`
`CIVIL ACTION
`
`COMPLAINT
`AND
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`CHRISTIAN EVERETT,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-v-
`
`
`
`
`
`TRANSUNION, LLC, EQUIFAX
`INFORMATION SERVICES, LLC, and
`EXPERIAN INFORMATION
`SOLUTIONS, INC.,
`
`
`
`
` Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1.
`
`Plaintiff, Christian Everett, brings this action under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15
`
`U.S.C. § 1681, et seq. (the “FCRA”) alleging that the three major consumer reporting
`
`agencies, Experian
`
`Information Solutions,
`
`Inc.
`
`(Experian), TransUnion, LLC
`
`(TransUnion) and Equifax Information Services, LLC (Equifax) have negligently and
`
`recklessly disseminated false information regarding the Plaintiff’s credit.
`
`2.
`
`Plaintiff further alleges TransUnion, Equifax and Experian failed to follow reasonable
`
`procedures to ensure maximum accuracy of credit reports they prepared concerning
`
`Plaintiff, and failed to investigate credit report inaccuracies in response to Plaintiff’s
`
`disputes.
`
`3.
`
`Plaintiff seeks statutory, actual, and punitive damages, along with injunctive and
`
`declaratory relief, and attorneys’ fees and costs.
`
`
`
`JURISDICTION
`
`4. The Court has jurisdiction of this matter under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and 15 U.S.C. § 1681p.
`
`-1-
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:22-cv-01066-ELR-JEM Document 1 Filed 03/16/22 Page 2 of 11
`
`All defendants regularly conduct business within the state of Georgia, and violated
`
`Plaintiffs rights under the FCRA in the state of Georgia as alleged more fully below.
`
`5. Venue is proper this district under 28 U.S.C. 1391(b) because Plaintiff resides in this
`
`district, Defendants conducts business in this district, and communications giving rise to
`
`this action occurred in this district.
`
`PARTIES
`
`6.
`
`Plaintiff, Christian Everett (“Plaintiff”), is a resident of Atlanta, Georgia and is a
`
`“consumer” as that term is defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1681a(c).
`
`7. Defendant Experian Information Solutions, Inc. is one of the largest credit reporting
`
`agencies in the United States, and is engaged in the business of assembling and
`
`disseminating credit reports concerning hundreds of millions of consumers. Experian is a
`
`“consumer reporting agency” as defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1681a(f) of the FCRA, and is
`
`regularly engaged in the business of assembling, evaluating, and dispersing information
`
`concerning consumers for the purpose of furnishing consumer reports, as defined in 15
`
`U.S.C. § 1681a(d)(1) of the FCRA, to third parties.
`
`8. Experian Information Solutions, Inc. is a corporation incorporated in the State of Florida,
`
`with its principal place of business located in Costa Mesa, California.
`
`9. Defendant Equifax Information Services, LLC is one of the largest credit reporting
`
`agencies in the United States, and is engaged in the business of assembling and
`
`disseminating credit reports concerning hundreds of millions of consumers. Equifax is a
`
`“consumer reporting agency” as defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1681a(f) of the FCRA, and is
`
`regularly engaged in the business of assembling, evaluating, and dispersing information
`
`concerning consumers for the purpose of furnishing consumer reports, as defined in 15
`
`
`
`-2-
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:22-cv-01066-ELR-JEM Document 1 Filed 03/16/22 Page 3 of 11
`
`U.S.C. § 1681a(d)(1) of the FCRA, to third parties.
`
`10. Equifax’s principal place of business is 1550 Peach Tree Street, N.W., Atlanta, GA 30309.
`
`11. Defendant TransUnion, LLC is one of the largest credit reporting agencies in the United
`
`States, and is engaged in the business of assembling and disseminating credit reports
`
`concerning hundreds of millions of consumers. TransUnion is a “consumer reporting
`
`agency” as defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1681a(f) of the FCRA, and is regularly engaged in the
`
`business of assembling, evaluating, and dispersing information concerning consumers for
`
`the purpose of furnishing consumer reports, as defined in 15 U.S.C. § 1681a(d)(1) of the
`
`FCRA, to third parties.
`
`12. TransUnion, LLC is a limited liability company with its principal place of business located
`
`at 555 West Adams Street, Chicago, IL 60661.
`
`FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
`
`13. The Plaintiff is under an obligation to pay child support payments, which he pays every
`
`month.
`
`14. However, Plaintiff does not manually make those child support payments.
`
`15. Instead, those payments are garnished from Plaintiff’s wages and automatically deducted
`
`from the Plaintiff’s wages each pay period.
`
`16. As a result, Plaintiff always makes these payments on time, and his credit reports reflect
`
`his generally excellent history of making these payments over many years.
`
`17. However, inexplicably and randomly, the Plaintiff’s credit report reflects two of these
`
`payments in 2017 as a derogatory ‘Collection’, instead of the usual ‘OK’ notation which
`
`would signify a timely payment.
`
`18. Just as inexplicably and randomly, the Plaintiff’s credit report reflects another one of these
`
`
`
`-3-
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:22-cv-01066-ELR-JEM Document 1 Filed 03/16/22 Page 4 of 11
`
`payments in 2018 as a derogatory ‘Collection’, instead of the usual ‘OK’ notation which
`
`would signify a timely payment.
`
`19. Perturbed by this inaccurate reporting, and the significant impact it had on his credit report,
`
`the Plaintiff then proceeded to dispute this erroneous reporting with Experian, TransUnion
`
`and Equifax on or about December 20, 2021, to no avail. Specifically, Plaintiff wrote to
`
`the Defendants:
`
`I am writing to dispute inaccuracies on my credit report. Specifically, I
`am writing about
`• TACOMA DSHS, Opened on 01/18/2011, Balance: $920. Reported
`as collection in June 2018.
`• TACOMA DSHS, Opened on 12/12/2006, Balance: $313. Reported
`as collection in April and June 2017.
`
`
`This reporting is inaccurate. These relate to child support payments.
`However, I made these payments on time every month, as they are
`garnished directly from my wages. As you can see from the attached
`statements for the relevant months, these payments were garnished
`directly from my wages on time. I was therefore never late for these
`months and they were not in collection.
`
`
`20. With his disputes, Plaintiff included a copy of his paystubs, reflecting the garnished
`
`deductions for his child support obligations, thereby demonstrating that he made these
`
`payments on time, as he always had.
`
`21. Within 30 days of receipt of Plaintiff’s disputes, the Defendants were required to
`
`investigate the disputed information and provide the Plaintiff with the results of their
`
`investigation.
`
`22. Defendant Experian received the Plaintiff’s dispute letter on or about December 29, 2021,
`
`and did not adequately investigate the dispute or otherwise respond to the Plaintiff as
`
`required by law.
`
`23. Defendant Equifax received the Plaintiff’s dispute letter on or about December 25, 2021,
`-4-
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:22-cv-01066-ELR-JEM Document 1 Filed 03/16/22 Page 5 of 11
`
`and did not adequately investigate the dispute or otherwise respond to the Plaintiff as
`
`required by law.
`
`24. Defendant TransUnion received the Plaintiff’s dispute letter on or about December 23,
`
`2021, and did not adequately investigate the dispute or otherwise respond to the Plaintiff
`
`as required by law.
`
`25. Instead, Transunion ‘verified’ that the Plaintiff was being reported accurately, despite his
`
`paystubs flatly demonstrating otherwise.
`
`26. Plaintiff never even received any response to his dispute from Equifax.
`
`27. Similarly, Plaintiff never received any response to his dispute from Experian.
`
`28. Instead, the Plaintiff was forced to obtain his credit reports after the 30-day dispute period
`
`expired, and discovered that both Experian and Equifax were continuing to report this
`
`inaccurate information.
`
`29. At all times pertinent hereto, Experian, TransUnion and Equifax’ conduct was willful, and
`
`carried out in reckless disregard for a consumer’s rights as set forth under section 1681s
`
`and 1681i of the FCRA.
`
`30. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendants’ willful and/or negligent refusal to
`
`conduct a reasonable investigation as mandated by the FCRA, Plaintiff has been harmed
`
`in his daily life. For example, Plaintiff’s credit score dropped significantly because of this
`
`reporting, and the Plaintiff has been unable to obtain credit on favorable terms as a result.
`
`Plaintiff has further been denied credit on multiple occasions, all as a result of this
`
`inaccurate reporting. Plaintiff further suffered emotional distress along with frustration
`
`and annoyance because of the Defendants’ actions.
`
`
`
`-5-
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:22-cv-01066-ELR-JEM Document 1 Filed 03/16/22 Page 6 of 11
`
`COUNT I
`VIOLATIONS OF THE FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT
`15 U.S.C. § 1681i
` AGAINST EXPERIAN
`
`31. All preceding paragraphs are realleged.
`
`32. At all times pertinent hereto, Experian was a “consumer reporting agency” (“CRA”) as that
`
`term is defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1681a(c).
`
`33. The FCRA provides that if a CRA conducts an investigation of disputed information and
`
`confirms that the information is, in fact, inaccurate, or is unable to verify the accuracy of the
`
`disputed information, the CRA is required to delete that information from the consumer’s
`
`file. See 15 U.S.C. § 1681i(a)(5)(A).
`
`34. In December 2021, Plaintiff initiated a dispute with Experian requesting that they correct
`
`these specific items in his credit file that is patently inaccurate and damaging to him.
`
`35. Experian received the December 2021 dispute on December 29, 2021, as evidenced by the
`
`certified mail receipt in Plaintiff’s possession.
`
`36. However, Experian never responded to the Plaintiff’s dispute, as required by the FCRA.
`
`37. Instead, Experian, having either conducting no investigation or failing to conduct a
`
`reasonable investigation, verified the inaccurate item on his credit file, something that any
`
`basic investigation would have prevented.
`
`38. As a direct and proximate result of Experian’s willful and/or negligent refusal to conduct a
`
`reasonable investigation as mandated by the FCRA, Plaintiff has been harmed, as explained
`
`above.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-6-
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:22-cv-01066-ELR-JEM Document 1 Filed 03/16/22 Page 7 of 11
`
`COUNT II
`FAILURE TO ASSURE MAXIMUM POSSIBLE ACCURACY
`15 U.S.C. § 1681e(b)
`AGAINST EXPERIAN
`
`39. All preceding paragraphs are realleged.
`
`40. Section 1681e(b) of the FCRA requires that, “Whenever a consumer reporting agency
`
`prepares a consumer report it shall follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible
`
`accuracy of the information concerning the individual about whom the report relates.”
`
`41. Were Experian to follow procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the credit
`
`report it prepares concerning Plaintiff, it would have removed the inaccurate information
`
`being reported on the Plaintiff’s credit report, especially where a basic investigation of the
`
`Plaintiff’s dispute and accompanying documents would have corroborated Plaintiff’s
`
`disputes.
`
`42. As a direct and proximate result of Experian’s willful and/or negligent failure to follow
`
`procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information it reports, Plaintiff has
`
`been harmed, as explained above.
`
`COUNT III
`VIOLATIONS OF THE FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT
`16 U.S.C. § 1681i
` AGAINST EQUIFAX
`
`43. All preceding paragraphs are realleged.
`
`44. At all times pertinent hereto, Equifax was a “consumer reporting agency” (“CRA”) as that
`
`term is defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1681a(c).
`
`45. The FCRA provides that if a CRA conducts an investigation of disputed information and
`
`confirms that the information is, in fact, inaccurate, or is unable to verify the accuracy of the
`
`-7-
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:22-cv-01066-ELR-JEM Document 1 Filed 03/16/22 Page 8 of 11
`
`disputed information, the CRA is required to delete that information from the consumer’s
`
`file. See 15 U.S.C. § 1681i(a)(5)(A).
`
`46. In December 2021, Plaintiff initiated disputes with Equifax requesting that they correct these
`
`specific items in his credit file that were patently inaccurate and damaging to him.
`
`47. Equifax received the December 2021 dispute on December 25, 2021, as evidenced by the
`
`certified mail receipt in Plaintiff’s possession.
`
`48. Equifax, having either conducting no investigation or failing to conduct a reasonable
`
`investigation, verified the inaccurate items on his credit file, something that any basic
`
`investigation would have prevented.
`
`49. As a direct and proximate result of Equifax’s willful and/or negligent refusal to conduct a
`
`reasonable investigation as mandated by the FCRA, Plaintiff has been harmed, as explained
`
`above.
`
`COUNT IV
`FAILURE TO ASSURE MAXIMUM POSSIBLE ACCURACY
`15 U.S.C. § 1681e(b)
`AGAINST EQUIFAX
`
`50. All preceding paragraphs are realleged.
`
`51. Section 1681e(b) of the FCRA requires that, “Whenever a consumer reporting agency
`
`prepares a consumer report it shall follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible
`
`accuracy of the information concerning the individual about whom the report relates.”
`
`52. Were Equifax to follow procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the credit report
`
`it prepares concerning Plaintiff, it would have removed the inaccurate information being
`
`reported on the Plaintiff’s credit report, especially where a basic investigation of the
`
`Plaintiff’s dispute and accompanying documents would have corroborated Plaintiff’s
`
`disputes.
`
`
`
`-8-
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:22-cv-01066-ELR-JEM Document 1 Filed 03/16/22 Page 9 of 11
`
`53. As a direct and proximate result of Equifax’s willful and/or negligent failure to follow
`
`procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information it reports, Plaintiff has
`
`been harmed, as explained above.
`
`COUNT V
`VIOLATIONS OF THE FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT
`15 U.S.C. § 1681i
`AGAINST TRANSUNION
`
`54. All preceding paragraphs are realleged.
`
`55. At all times pertinent hereto, TransUnion was a “consumer reporting agency” (“CRA”) as
`
`that term is defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1681a(c).
`
`56. The FCRA provides that if a CRA conducts an investigation of disputed information and
`
`confirms that the information is, in fact, inaccurate, or is unable to verify the accuracy of the
`
`disputed information, the CRA is required to delete that information from the consumer’s
`
`file. See 15 U.S.C. § 1681i(a)(5)(A).
`
`57. In December 2021, Plaintiff initiated a dispute with TransUnion requesting that they correct
`
`specific items in his credit file that were patently inaccurate and damaging to him.
`
`58. Transunion received the December 2021 dispute on December 23, 2021, as evidenced by the
`
`certified mail receipt in Plaintiff’s possession.
`
`59. TransUnion, having either conducting no investigation or failing to conduct a reasonable
`
`investigation, verified the inaccurate items on his credit file, something that any basic
`
`investigation would have prevented.
`
`60. As a direct and proximate result of TransUnion’s willful and/or negligent refusal to conduct
`
`a reasonable investigation as mandated by the FCRA, Plaintiff has been harmed, as explained
`
`above.
`
`
`
`
`
`-9-
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:22-cv-01066-ELR-JEM Document 1 Filed 03/16/22 Page 10 of 11
`
`COUNT VI
`FAILURE TO ASSURE MAXIMUM POSSIBLE ACCURACY
`15 U.S.C. § 1681e(b)
`AGAINST TRANSUNION
`
`
`61. All preceding paragraphs are realleged.
`
`62. Section 1681e(b) of the FCRA requires that, “Whenever a consumer reporting agency
`
`prepares a consumer report it shall follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible
`
`accuracy of the information concerning the individual about whom the report relates.”
`
`63. Were TransUnion to follow procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the credit
`
`report it prepares concerning Plaintiff, it would have removed the inaccurate information
`
`being reported on the Plaintiff’s credit report, especially where a basic investigation of the
`
`Plaintiff’s dispute and accompanying documents would have corroborated Plaintiff’s
`
`disputes.
`
`64. As a direct and proximate result of TransUnion’s willful and/or negligent failure to follow
`
`procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information it reports, Plaintiff has
`
`been harmed, as explained above.
`
`DEMAND FOR TRIAL BY JURY
`
`65. Pursuant to Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff hereby requests a trial
`
`by jury on all issues so triable.
`
`
`
`
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demand judgment against Defendants as follows:
`
`A. Awarding Plaintiff actual damages;
`
`B. Awarding Plaintiff statutory damages;
`
`C. Awarding Plaintiff punitive damages;
`
`
`
`-10-
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:22-cv-01066-ELR-JEM Document 1 Filed 03/16/22 Page 11 of 11
`
`D. Awarding Plaintiff the costs of this action and reasonable attorneys’ fees and expenses;
`
`E. Awarding pre-judgment interest and post-judgment interest;
`
`F. A declaration that the Defendants’ conduct alleged herein is unlawful, as set forth more
`
`fully above;
`
`G. Equitable relief, enjoining the Defendants from engaging in the unjust and unlawful
`
`conduct alleged herein; and
`
`H. Awarding Plaintiff such other and further relief as this Court may deem just and proper.
`
`/s/ Misty Oaks Paxton
`Misty Oaks Paxton, Esq.
`THE OAKS FIRM
`3895 Brookgreen Pt.
`Decatur, GA 30034
`Tel: (404) 500-7861
`Email: attyoaks@yahoo.com
`
`/s/ Yitzchak Zelman
`Yitzchak Zelman, Esq.
`MARCUS & ZELMAN, LLC
`701 Cookman Avenue, Suite 300
`Asbury Park, New Jersey 07712
`(732) 695-3282 telephone
`yzelman@marcuszelman.com
`PRO HAC VICE MOTION TO BE FILED
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`
`
`Dated: March 15, 2022
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`By:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-11-
`
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
