Just Talking Mixed Files With TU [Under Oath]; Must Read

Father-Son, Mother-Daughter, Junior-Senior-Trey [Generational Designators], Common Names, Variations on Social Security Numbers and Other Mixed File Issues
David A. Szwak

Just Talking Mixed Files With TU [Under Oath]; Must Read

Postby David A. Szwak » Tue Nov 08, 2005 9:23 am

1
1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
IN AND FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
2 Southern Division
3
WENDY PORTER,
4
Plaintiff,
5
v. Civil Action No.
6 02-73673
TRANS UNION, LLC, JUDGE BORMAN
7
Defendant.
8
9 The videotaped deposition of LYNN S.
10 ROMANOWSKI, called by the plaintiff for examination,
11 pursuant to notice, and pursuant to the Rules of
12 Civil Procedure for the United States District
13 Courts, taken before Cheryl A. Goetsch, CSR and
14 Notary Public in and for the County of DuPage and
15 State of Illinois, on October 22, 2003, at
16 2:39 p.m., at 25 East Washington Street, Suite 1805,
17 Chicago, Illinois.

************


46
6 Q And then if you wanted to go back and
7 actually see what information was contained in those
8 files at that point in time, you could either pull
9 and retrieve from archives the actual subscriber
10 version report that was issued or presumably you
11 could go to your name scans and see what the monthly
12 periodic snapshot would have looked like, correct?
13 A Not necessarily. The -- they might not
14 correspond exactly to the date.
15 Q Because of the date that they're
16 snapshotted on, correct?
17 A Yes.
18 Q Okay. Because if -- for example, with the
19 name scans, those may be snapshotted on the last day
20 of a particular month, whereas not every inquiry
21 that's made would necessarily be on the last day of
22 the month, correct?
23 A Correct.
24 Q Okay. Did you find that with Exhibit 15

47
1 and 16 that the Goodman Automotive inquiry
2 pertaining to the plaintiff resulted in a credit
3 report being published by TransUnion to Goodman
4 Automotive containing both of the same data files
5 that we've previously looked at, meaning the -- the
6 data file pertaining to the plaintiff and the data
7 file that contains the indicative information of
8 William Porter, although it lists the plaintiff's
9 Social Security number?
10 A I'm sorry. Part of that cut out.
11 MR. Szwak: Okay. Madam Court Reporter,
12 could you start reading it back, and let me fill
13 in the gaps if you didn't get all of it.
14 (Question read.)
15 A Are you referring to the -- the credit
16 reports from Exhibit 2 and 3?
17 BY MR. Szwak:
18 Q Well, that would be where we first saw the
19 two data files, would be in Exhibit 2 where there's
20 a data file pertaining to the plaintiff. It begins
21 Wendy Porter, with Wendy Porter's address and her
22 Social. And there's a second data file that begins
23 "Subject" (sic) . . . N. Porter, though both of the
24 data files contain the plaintiff's Social Security

48
1 number.
2 A Okay.
3 Q And I -- I guess the court reporter read
4 back my question.
5 A I'm sorry. I forgot what the question was.
6 I was trying to look at the other exhibit.
7 THE COURT REPORTER: Do you want it back
8 again?
9 MR. Szwak: Yes, ma'am, please.
10 (Question read as follows:
11 "Q Okay. Did you find that with Exhibit
12 15 and 16 that the Goodman Automotive inquiry
13 pertaining to the plaintiff resulted in a credit
14 report being published by TransUnion to Goodman
15 Automotive containing both of the same data
16 files that we've previously looked at, meaning
17 the -- the data file pertaining to the plaintiff
18 and the data file that contains the indicative
19 information of William Porter, although it lists
20 the plaintiff's Social Security number?")
21 MR. CENTO: Object to the form.
22 A The Goodman Auto has two credit reports
23 that are returned, one for Wendy N. Porter and the
24 other one for William N. Porter. And it looks again

49
1 like the Social Security numbers are the same, which
2 I believe you said was the Social Security number
3 that belongs to Wendy Porter.

4 BY MR. Szwak:
5 Q Okay. Your testimony is, is that these are
6 two separate credit reports that were returned to
7 Goodman Automotive; is that correct?
8 A Yes.

9 Q And did you find any indication of an
10 inquiry by Goodman Automotive for the credit report
11 of William Porter?
12 MR. CENTO: Object to the form.
13 A There is an inquiry on William Porter's
14 credit report that -- it says Goodman Auto.

15 BY MR. Szwak:
16 Q But -- but my question is, did you find any
17 indication that Goodman Automotive requested his
18 credit report file?
19 MR. CENTO: Same objection.
20 A I don't know what the input was for Goodman
21 Automotive for -- in response to that inquiry.
22 BY MR. Szwak:
23 Q Do you believe it to be different from that
24 which we looked at in the Invoice Detail?

50
1 A Okay. Well, the Invoice Detail will --
2 I -- I believe this is the Invoice Detail record
3 that's indicated for this -- for this credit report
4 being returned. But again the Invoice Detail report
5 only lists the partial input information.
6 Q You're referring to Exhibit 16, correct?
7 A 16A.

8 Q 16A. But nowhere on 16A does it reflect
9 any request for a William Porter?
10 MR. CENTO: Object to the form.
11 A I'm sorry. Did you say anything after
12 "William Porter"?
13 BY MR. Szwak:
14 Q No. There's no indication anywhere on
15 Exhibit 16A or any of the pages that follow that
16 there was ever a request by Goodman Automotive for a
17 credit report on William Porter, correct?
18 MR. CENTO: Object to the form.
19 A That's correct.

20 BY MR. Szwak:
21 Q Now, I think we can summarize TransUnion's
22 position in the case is that Goodman Automotive may
23 have made an inquiry, inputting the indicative
24 information of the plaintiff, but that TransUnion

51
1 believes that it issued two different credit reports
2 to Goodman Automotive, one credit report pertaining
3 to the plaintiff and a second credit report on
4 William Porter; is that correct?
5 A Yes, that is correct.

6 Q . . . (sic) determined that the second --
7 A I'm sorry. You're --
8 MR. CENTO: Start over, David, with that
9 question.
10 BY MR. Szwak:
11 Q Is it correct to say that it would be
12 TransUnion's position that Goodman Automotive should
13 have determined that the second credit report did
14 not pertain to the plaintiff?
15 MR. CENTO: Object to the form.
16 A I'm sorry. Can you repeat that question?
17 BY MR. Szwak:
18 Q Yes.
19 MR. Szwak: Ms. Court Reporter, could you
20 read that back, please.
21 (Question read.)
22 MR. CENTO: Object to the form, lack of
23 foundation.
24 A Prior to the William Porter credit report

52
1 being printed, above it it says, "Possible
2 additional consumer file(s) to follow." In
3 addition, there's -- there's a Trans-Alert message
4 on this credit file.

5 BY MR. Szwak:
6 Q Okay. And it's TransUnion's position that
7 the statement about "Possible additional consumer
8 file(s) to follow" would be an indication to its
9 subscriber that the second report does not pertain
10 to the plaintiff?
11 A No, not necessarily.
12 Q I mean, does it -- does it tell the
13 potential user of this credit report at all whether
14 or not the second credit file pertains to the
15 plaintiff?
16 A It indicates that it's a possible
17 additional consumer file.

18 Q Well, if -- if there is some lack of -- of
19 determination about whether it pertains to the
20 target of the inquiry, then why is that file being
21 returned?
22 A Because it sufficiently matched the input
23 information.
24 Q And we really had not covered that issue

53
1 yet, but I'm -- I'm going to -- let me see if I
2 can -- can speed this up some for you. Is it -- is
3 it accurate to say that TransUnion would have
4 considered this second data file as potentially
5 matching the plaintiff based upon the same last
6 name, being Porter, the first initial of the first
7 name being W, and the fact that somehow plaintiff's
8 Social Security number became matched with the name
9 William N. Porter?
10 MR. CENTO: Object to the form.
11 A Those are all contributing factors.

12 BY MR. Szwak:
13 Q Do you know of any others?
14 A Yes.
15 Q The fact that they're both in the state of
16 Michigan?
17 A Yes.
18 Q And is there -- to your knowledge, is there
19 any other contributing factor?
20 A Not that I can think of offhand.

Return to “Mixed File Cases”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest