Mixed Files: Trans Union: Brief Excerpt

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

Mixed Files: Trans Union: Brief Excerpt

Postby David A. Szwak » Tue Oct 18, 2005 6:04 am

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
IN AND FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
Eastern Division

GERALD HOUSTON BRECKENRIDGE, JR.
Plaintiff,

Versus Civil Action No.
3:03CV0173-SRM
TRANS UNION, LLC, JURY DEMANDED,
Defendant.

PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE AND OPPOSITION TO
MOTION FOR PARTIAL DISMISSAL FILED BY TRANS UNION, LLC

MAY IT PLEASE THE COURT:

Plaintiff opposes Trans Union, LLC’s [“Trans Union’s”] pending motion to dismiss, as follows:

Plaintiff's complaint provides a generous overview of facts and counts as to the defendant. Plaintiff’s credit report has been repeatedly mis-merged and mixed with credit reporting data of plaintiff’s father. Plaintiff and his father have repeatedly disputed Trans Union’s mixing and merging of the credit report data, to no avail. Trans Union had claimed to correct the matters but failed to do so and the problem has perpetuated for a very long time.

Plaintiff sustained a variety of damages due to Trans Union’s fault and violations of the FCRA. Plaintiff's complaint is well-plead and more than adequate and does comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8[a].

At the outset, Your Honor should note that this defendant has historically plagued other consumers in the exact same manner. In Philbin v. Trans Union Corp., 101 F.3d 957 [3rd Cir. 1996], plaintiff was denied credit because Trans Union confused his name with his father's and issued mixed file credit reports. He brought an action pursuant to the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. 1681e(b).

In O'Connor v. Trans Union Corp., 1998 U.S.Dist.Lexis 6774 [U.S.D.C. E.D. Pa. 1998], [[Also reporting decisions at: 1998 U.S.Dist.Lexis 15129, and 1998 U.S.Dist.Lexis 17321, and 1999 U.S.Dist.Lexis 14917.]] plaintiff sued Trans Union for repeatedly mixing his credit records with that of his son, including improper posting of public records data. That case also settled before trial.

In Thomas v. Trans Union Credit Information Co., 1992 U.S.Dist.Lexis 15049, p.4 [U.S.D.C. N.D. Ill. 1992], the court noted that “[M]ore specifically, plaintiffs submit evidence that at least on one occasion Trans Union has delivered plaintiffs' credit information with that of Ricky Thomas in a mixed file without any warning that the information supplied, and used by Credit Data to generate a credit report, contained credit histories of three separate individuals: plaintiffs Richard and Rae Ellen Thomas along with Ricky Thomas.” Mixed file cases are very prevalent and problematic to consumers.

In Lazar v. Trans Union, 195 F.R.D. 665, 673-74 [U.S.D.C. C.D. Cal. 2000], [[Undersigned counsel represented Dr. Gary Lazar in that action.]] Dr. Gary Lazar, an Oncologist, had his Trans Union credit reports repeatedly corrupted over a period of time exceeding ten years, on and off. Trans Union repeatedly mixed public records data belonging to a “criminal/tax deadbeat” named Gary Lazar [who resided in California also but had no relation to plaintiff nor did the “bad” Lazar steal plaintiff’s identity]. Bad Lazar merely ran up tax liens, judgments and other public record misdeeds to which Trans Union ascribed to Dr. Lazar. Dr. Lazar also repeatedly contested the false items only to be told by Trans Union that Trans Union would remove them but Trans Union would not remove them and re-reported them again and again over time. Lazar’s case is almost identical on its facts to Breckenridge. Plaintiff respectfully suggests that many of the legal issues will be the same as well.

The foregoing was but a small sample of mixed file cases litigated against Trans Union.

Return to “Mixed File Cases”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest