What Factors Are Important in Mixed Files?

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

What Factors Are Important in Mixed Files?

Postby David A. Szwak » Thu Nov 17, 2005 7:33 pm

4 Plaintiff, *
5 VS. * NO. 00-CV-0040
7 Defendant. *
9 *********************************************************
11 AUGUST 16, 2000
13 *********************************************************
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
24 plaintiff?
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
2 names?
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
20 consumer?
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
17 sorry.
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
21 investigation.
22 Q. Which investigation?
23 A. As a result of all of the different
24 investigations.
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
7 1999.
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
24 mix?
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
4 difference.
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.

Return to “Mixed File Cases”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest