1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
2 SHERMAN DIVISION
3 JAMES E. JENSEN, *
4 Plaintiff, *
* CIVIL ACTION
5 VS. * NO. 00-CV-0040
6 EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC.*
7 Defendant. *
10 ORAL AND VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF CAROLYN HELM
11 AUGUST 16, 2000
12 VOLUME 1
16 ANSWERS AND DEPOSITION OF CAROLYN HELM, produced as a
17 witness duly sworn by me at the instance of the Plaintiff,
18 taken in the above-styled and -numbered cause on the 16th
19 day of August, 2000, A.D., beginning at 9:54 a.m. to 2:29
20 p.m., before LISA C. HUNDT, a Certified Shorthand Reporter
21 in and for the State of Texas, reported by machine
22 shorthand, in the offices of Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue,
23 located at 2727 North Harwood, Dallas, Texas, in accordance
24 with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the
25 agreements hereinafter set forth.
6 Q. Okay. So the fact that someone might move from
7 state to state is really not an indication whether or not
8 it's that person, correct?
9 A. It's not an indication that it's not that person.
10 Q. Right. The other names that were associated with
11 the files that had been mixed with Mr. Jensen, were those
12 people with the same name or similar names?
13 A. Similar names.
14 Q. Do you know those names were?
15 A. I believe there was a James E. Jensen; however,
16 the E stood for something else, other than what
17 Mr. Jensen's middle name was.
18 Q. There also was a James Edwin Jensen?
19 A. I believe that's our consumer, Edwin.
20 Q. Okay. And then there was a Jim Jensen?
21 A. (Nods head.)
22 Q. Did you find that there were two other social
23 security numbers reflected in the reports involving the
25 A. I believe there were other social security
1 numbers, yes.
2 Q. There was not only his social security number, but
3 there were two others that were not within seven of nine
4 digits of each other; is that correct?
5 A. They were different -- they were different. I
6 don't know what you mean by seven or nine.
7 Q. Well, they were not almost a match in terms of the
8 sequence of numbers in the social?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. In essence, if -- if we were to take any social
11 security number, they were not within a seven of nine
12 numeric match of each other?
13 A. There were -- there were probably more digits
14 other than two that were different. I think that's what
15 you mean, yes.
16 Q. Yes, it is. I believe one of them -- just one
17 second. I apologize for being a little bit out of sequence
18 in what I was going to ask. Pardon me. I'm just going to
19 take one quick second.
20 Okay. I'm looking at what appears to be Experian
21 No. 38, and I'll show it to you. Do the social security
22 numbers, the three of them that appear on that page, do
23 those appear to be the three numbers that you found that
24 had been mixed with the plaintiff's information, one of
25 them being his accurate, true social security number and
1 the other two corresponding to other consumers with similar
3 A. Yes. I believe these are the two different social
4 security numbers.
5 Q. Okay. Thank you. And one of those appears to be
6 501-52-5849, and the other is 092-56-0021?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Were you able to determine whether there was other
9 identifying information which might have caused the records
10 or data of these other two consumers to be mixed with
11 Mr. Jensen, the plaintiff?
12 A. There was a variance of data. I didn't actually
13 work on this particular mixed file, but there was variance
14 of names, different social, different addresses.
15 Q. What corresponding information caused that
16 information to merge together or mix together?
17 A. I don't believe there was a determination of that.
18 Q. Was it -- were you able to even determine the
19 identifying information in connection with the other
21 A. We were able to determine that certain social
22 security numbers were related to different addresses.
23 Those -- then those were related to different names.
24 Q. Okay. Well, if we have James Jensen on Ridgecrest
25 Drive in Boise, Idaho, with a particular social security
1 number, and we know that his social security number did not
2 match, and they're not even close to the other two social
3 security numbers reported, do you know what other
4 identifying information existed on these other two
5 consumers which might have caused these -- these pieces of
6 data to blend together?
7 A. I don't have that information.
8 Q. By looking at the admin report, are you able to
9 discern what other information might have caused the data
10 to blend together?
11 A. I don't think there's any indication on this admin
12 that -- that would cause that.
13 Q. When you -- when you looked at the admin report,
14 did you find a name in association with the other social
15 security numbers under the name cross-reference system?
16 A. Okay. I didn't follow you there, David. I'm
18 Q. Sure. Did you find the name that was associated
19 with the other social security numbers --
20 A. No.
21 Q. -- in the cross-reference section?
22 A. The admin that we pulled at 2/1 of 2000, as a
23 result of the lawsuit, didn't have the variances that may
24 have first occurred in 1998.
25 Q. Do you believe that these files began mixing
1 together in 1998?
2 A. I don't know when it began. It's just there's no
3 indication in 2000 because the file had already been
4 updated in 1998 and '99. So in this particular admin,
5 there's no indication at all that the file was mixed here.
6 Q. Let me see if I understood what you said
7 correctly. When you reviewed this particular admin, you
8 didn't find any indication that the file had been mixed?
9 A. I didn't -- we didn't find any indication that the
10 file -- that the names that appeared before still appeared.
11 There is an indication that there is a preventative flag --
12 it's what we call a flag -- on the file to prevent the
13 combination of the files.
14 Q. Well, do you -- do you believe Mr. Jensen -- or do
15 you agree or disagree with his position that his file
16 continued to be mixed and contain inaccurate information
17 pertaining to the other two consumers, but being attributed
18 to him, after he contacted you in 1998?
19 A. I believe there were still inaccurate trade lines
20 being reported. We know that now as a result of the
22 Q. Which investigation?
23 A. As a result of all of the different
25 Q. How many different investigations did you
1 determine occurred at Experian?
2 A. I believe Mr. Jensen contacted us in March --
3 actually twice in March with a duplicate dispute. I think
4 once in late March, and I guess it went into -- even though
5 the letter was dated March, we received it, actually, in
6 April. And then, also, another one the following year, in
8 And then I believe that we did an investigation as a
9 result of the lawsuit as well.
10 Q. Do you believe that the only name pertaining to
11 these other two social security numbers is the last name
12 Jensen with a first name Jim or James?
13 A. I believe that there's a middle -- there is a
14 middle name or initial in there as well.
15 Q. Do you have any information as to whether either
16 of these other two consumers ever lived in the same
17 geographic area as the plaintiff?
18 A. I don't know.
19 Q. Assuming that these other two gentlemen -- these
20 other two James Jensens -- have not lived in Boise, Idaho,
21 or in any other city where the plaintiff has lived in the
22 past -- or particularly, not at the same address -- can
23 Experian offer any information as to why these files would
25 A. Well, here again, I'm not a system expert. But
1 there -- just depending on the variance of information,
2 either the creditors input when accessing the file or when
3 the consumer is actually requesting his file, can make a
5 Q. Do you have any information that Mr. Jensen, the
6 plaintiff, in any way contributed to the mixing of this
7 file information?
8 A. No, I don't.
9 Q. Do you have any information that the creditors
10 that were involved with these other two gentlemen -- the
11 other two James Jensens -- do you have any information that
12 either -- any of those creditors contributed to the mixing
13 of this information?
14 A. I don't have any information as to how they access
15 the credit report. I just was stating how it could happen.
16 Q. Do you have any information that would suggest
17 that either of these other Mr. Jensens ever used the social
18 security number of the plaintiff --
19 A. No.
20 Q. -- Jensen?
21 A. I don't.
22 Q. From your review, you could not find any inquiries
23 made from these other addresses associated with the other
24 Jensens that bore the same social security number as the
25 plaintiff Jensen?
1 A. No.
Father-Son, Mother-Daughter, Junior-Senior-Trey [Generational Designators], Common Names, Variations on Social Security Numbers and Other Mixed File Issues
- General Discussions, Forum Registration, and ID Theft and Credit-Related News Stories
- General Discussion
- News Stories on Identity Theft, Personal Data Thefts and Credit Reporting Abuses
- Current Cases
- Lawyer Jokes
- FCRA Statute and Defined Terms Under the FCRA
- FCRA Statute And Amendments: 15 U.S.C. 1681, et. seq.
- What is a Consumer [Credit] Reporting Agency?
- What is a Consumer [Credit] Report?
- Resellers: Who are They? What Do They Do? Are They Liable Under the FCRA?
- Investigative Consumer [Credit] Reports
- Who is a Furnisher?
- How to Get Your Credit Reports and How and Who to Write Your Dispute Letters to
- How To Get Your Credit Reports
- Dispute Letters
- Do You Have To Pay For Your Credit Report?
- FCRA Private Rights of Action and Duties Imposed by the FCRA
- Impermissible Access: 15 U.S.C. 1681b[f] and 1681q
- Front End Duties of the Credit Reporting Agencies: 15 U.S.C. 1681e(b)
- Back End Duties of the CRAs: 1681i[a]:
- Credit Bureau's Duty to Provide Consumer Documentation to Furnisher: 1681i[a][B]
- Duty to Add a Consumer's Dispute Statement in Association with a Specific Account and In Connection with the Credit File/Report: 15 U.S.C. 1681i[c]
- Furnisher FCRA Liability: 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2
- Failing to Mark Contested Accounts As Disputed: 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2[a]
- Obsolescence: When Must the Credit Reportings Come Off of the Credit Report: 15 U.S.C. 1681c
- Duty to Notate Disputed Accounts As Such: 15 U.S.C. 1681c[f]
- Adverse Action Notice Rules: 15 U.S.C. 1681m and ECOA
- Credit Solicitations Are Required to be Clear and Conspicuous: 1681m[d]
- Potential Exposure For Sanctions Due to Filing Bad Faith FCRA Cases: 15 U.S.C. 1681n[c], 28 U.S.C. 1927, and Fed.R.Civ.Proc. 11
- Credit Repair Organizations Act [CROA]
- 1681g: Credit Bureaus' Duties to Provide Reports/Disclosures and to Add 100 Word Statements of the Consumer
- Affiliate Sharing Problems and Violations, 15 U.S.C. 1681s-3
- Common Credit Report Errors and Agency Misconduct
- Credit Errors
- Theft of Identity
- Mixed File Cases
- Re-Aging: Debt Collector's Efforts to Revive Obsolete Reportings
- Reinsertion of Previously Deleted Data: How and When Can It Happen?
- VIP Databases and Offline Status
- Deceased Reporting Cases
- Causation: The Crucial Link Between Breach of a Duty and Damages
- Causation to Damage [Proving Your Damages Are Related to and Caused by the Defendants
- Types of Damages, Remedies, and Awards Under the FCRA and Related State Law Claims
- Damages Under FCRA
- Punitive Damages: 15 U.S.C. 1681n
- Injunctive Relief: FCRA and State Law
- Attorneys' Fees, Litigation Expenses and Costs:
- Declaratory Relief Under the FCRA
- What is Your Potential Case Worth? Other Case Verdicts, etc.
- FCRA Jury and Bench Trial Verdicts
- Other Federal Laws Related to Credit Reporting, Data Privacy, Billing Errors and ID Theft
- FDCPA Statute And Amendments: 15 U.S.C. 1692, et. seq.
- Fair Credit Billing Act, 15 U.S.C. 1666, et. seq.
- Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act of 1998, 18 U.S.C. §1028
- Home Affordable Modification Program (“HAMP”) and Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives Program (“HAFA”)
- State Law Claims Related to Credit Reporting, Billing Errors, Privacy Breaches and ID Theft
- Invasion of Privacy: State Law
- Defamation: State Law
- Interference With Prospective Credit: State Law
- Interference With Marital/Family Relations: State Law
- Infliction of Emotional Distress/Mental Anguish: State Law
- Data Breach Claims and Issues
- Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Claims: State Law
- Jurisdiction, Venue, Removal to Federal Court, Remand to State Court, and Other Pre-Trial Jurisdicti
- Removal of FCRA Cases From State Court To Federal Court
- Personal Jurisdiction and Venue in Credit Reporting Cases
- FCRA Litigation Strategies and Procedural Issues and Law
- Settlements, Releases, Prevailing Party Status, and Other Things You Need to Know If You Resolve Your Case Before Judgment
- Offers of Judgment In FCRA Litigation
- Secret Documents, Product Information and Testimony
- Choicepoint Secret Documents:
- Equifax/CSC and Affiliates Secret Documents:
- Experian Secret Documents
- Innovis Secret Documents:
- Trans Union Secret Documents
- Furnisher and Public Records Suppliers Secret Documents
- Respondeat Superior, Vicarious Liability, and Whether Others Are Liable
- Liability For Employee's FCRA Violations? Liability For FCRA Violations by Third Parties?
- FCRA Preemption, Immunity, and Qualified Immunity
- FCRA Preemption: 15 U.S.C. 1681t[b][F] and Related Discussions
- FCRA Qualified Immunity: 15 U.S.C. 1681h[e] and Related Discussions
- States/Govermental Immunity From FCRA Claims?
- Jury Voir Dire, Instructions, Verdict Forms, etc.
- Jury Instructions and Jury Verdict Forms
- Jury Questionnaires, Voir Dire, Jury Selection and Jury Bias
- Credit Card Issues
- Credit Card Liabilities
- Do You Have a Right to Bring Claims and How Long Do You Have?
- Statute Of Limitation: 15 U.S.C. 1681p
- Standing to Sue
- Credit Scores, Adverse Action Codes, and Other Report Codes
- Credit Scores, Adverse Action Codes, Risk Factors, Denial Codes and Other Scores and Codes Supplied by the Credit Reporting Agencies
- The Mechanics of Credit Reporting
- Public Records Reportings [Non-Bankruptcy]
- Bankruptcy Reporting
- Student Loan Credit Reporting
- Metro Tape [I and II]: Standardized Credit Reporting Formats Used by the Credit Industry
- Defenses Asserted by Credit Reporting Defendants
- What Law Applies? Problems Barring Use of the Court and Law
- Arbitration, Forum Selection, Choice of Law, Choice of Venue and Other Adhesionary Clauses
- Conflicts of Laws Issues in FCRA and Related State Law Issues
- Standing and Statutes of Limitations
- Statute Of Limitation: 15 U.S.C. 1681p
- FCRA Legal Forms [Suits, Discovery, etc.]
- Discovery: Interrogatories, Requests For Production of Documents, Requests to Inspect, Requests For Admissions, Deposition Notices, Subpoenas, Deposit
- FCRA Sample Pleadings: Complaints, Motions, Oppositions and Other Standard Lawsuit Filings
- Defenses Frequently Asserted by Defendants to Consumer's Actions
- FCRA Class Actions and Class Issues
- FCRA Class Actions
- Special Evidentiary Issues: What is Evidence?
- Evidentiary Issues in FCRA Cases
- Expert Witnesses, Special Issues and Daubert and Related Challenges
- Appellate Issues, Rules, Law, Etc.
- Defenses Asserted by Industry and Abuse Stories
- Defense Counsel Abuses and War Stories
- Law Outlines: Various Topics
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests