Page 1 of 1

XPN PARROTING THE SUBSCRIBER'S RESPONSE IN REINVESTIGATION

Posted: Sun Nov 27, 2005 2:44 pm
by David A. Szwak
1
1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
IN AND FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
2
3 LARRY E. CARRIERE, II *
*
4 V. * Civil Action No.
* CV03-1340-S
5 EXPERIAN INFORMATION *
SOLUTIONS *
6
7
8
9
10 ORAL AND VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF
11 SHANNON LEE STAFFORD
12 JUNE 8, 2004
13
14
15
16
17 ORAL AND VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF SHANNON LEE
18 STAFFORD, produced as a witness at the instance of the
19 Plaintiff, taken in the above-styled and numbered cause on
20 the 8th day of June, 2004, at 9:57 a.m., before Frances M.
21 Blacha, a Certified Shorthand Reporter in and for the State
22 of Texas, reported by machine shorthand, in the offices of
23 Jones Day, 2727 N. Harwood Street, Dallas, Texas 75201, in
24 the City of Dallas, County of Dallas and State of Texas, in
25 accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

100
24 Q Well, my question was this: If you sent him a
25 disclosure on August 30 of 2002 --

101
1 A Uh-huh.
2 Q -- do you know if he contacted you with any
3 disputes?
4 I'm not trying to trick you. I'm going to
5 show a stack of CDVs and ACDVs from it looks like -- it
6 looks like he would have disputed these things to you in
7 September and you conducted reinvestigation.
8 A I apologize. I was going based on the disclosure
9 log which we've been -- I thought you were asking me if we
10 sent him another report based on this log.
11 But after August 30th, looking at the D/R
12 log, it looks like we have some investigations that were
13 conducted on September 30th, 2003 -- oh, I'm sorry. I keep
14 saying 2003 when I'm looking for 2002.
15 I see some investigations we conducted on
16 December 11th, 2002; October 30th, 2002.
17 Q If we could, let's try to take the very first one
18 after -- after he received his disclosure.
19 What was his first dispute with you and when
20 was that, please?
21 A Okay. If we're looking at the disputes that were
22 conducted on August the 30th, 2002 --
23 MR. McLOON: What page are you on?
24 THE WITNESS: Page 24.
25 Q Okay. What did he dispute to you on that very

102
1 day?
2 MR. McLOON: Did you say August 30th?
3 THE WITNESS: October.
4 MR. McLOON: I'm sorry. I misheard you.
5 A Okay. On Page 24, the first item according to
6 the D/R log that was investigated was a Gulf Coast Bank.
7 Q Okay. And what did he complain about in his
8 communication with you?
9 A Well, I can tell you, based off of this document,
10 the investigation was a status investigation that it should
11 be reflected as a current account.
12 Q Okay. Let me show you Exhibit 1A and ask you:
13 Is that a CDV document?
14 MR. McLOON: Could I have the Bates number,
15 please? Or the date?
16 THE WITNESS: Bates, 387.
17 MR. McLOON: Thank you.
18 A Yes. This is a consumer dispute verification
19 form.
20 Q And what's the purpose of that communication?
21 A It's notifying we're sending out information to
22 Gulf Coast asking them to verify the information that they
23 have in their database with the information that we have
24 based upon the dispute that was entered.
25 Q Is that part of your ordinary procedures for

103
1 reinvestigation?
2 A Yes.
3 Q Now, after you send out the consumer dispute
4 verification document, in this case to Gulf Coast, what does
5 Experian do to further reinvestigate that item?
6 A Well, upon receipt of the consumer dispute
7 verification form from the subscriber, we will go through
8 the information that's been provided to us and update the
9 accounts or delete the accounts or remain the accounts.
10 Q And that would be based upon the directives from
11 the lender, the person reporting the information?
12 A It just depends.
13 Q Depends on what?
14 A Well, if they verify that -- and after we
15 evaluate the CDV form, if all of the name information that
16 they have matches with the name information that we have and
17 if they want us to just update an account to reflect either
18 a balance amount, if for some reason -- or I think I just
19 misspoke -- they just want us to update a balance, then we
20 would go ahead and update unless for some reason we're not
21 able to read the form or if for some reason we couldn't make
22 sense of the form or if they're -- the balance they were
23 wanting us to update was just something incredulous, an
24 incredulous amount, we may conduct some type of phone
25 verification if we don't understand the form.

104
1 Q Okay. On this particular Exhibit 1A, how did the
2 Gulf Coast Bank respond to Mr. Carriere's disputes?
3 A Under the change data as shown box, they have
4 indicated on here that the last payment was on October 15th,
5 2002. Balance is $13,792. It's an open current account and
6 was at one point in time 30 days late. And I believe that's
7 10 times.
8 Q You say 10 times?
9 A Uh-huh.
10 Q Is their response consistent or inconsistent with
11 what Mr. Carriere was complaining about?
12 MR. McLOON: Objection. Vague.
13 A Well, according to the dispute that was lodged on
14 the D/R log, the dispute was that this account should be
15 updated to a current account with no delinquencies, and here
16 it's showing that it was at one point a delinquent account.
17 Q Okay. So they disagreed with what Mr. Carriere
18 said about the status of the account?
19 A Well, they're saying that the records reflect
20 that there were delinquencies associated with this account
21 whereas the dispute was there weren't any.
22 Q Okay. Now, in this circumstance, in this type of
23 reinvestigation where the status of the account is disputed,
24 does Experian do anything else to reinvestigate or do they
25 accept the word of the subscriber and leave the late pay

105
1 notations in file?
2 MR. McLOON: Object. Argumentative.
3 A Well, again, it just depends upon how the data is
4 sent back to us. If we have a situation where they came
5 back and said the consumer's name is completely different
6 than what we have, then we're not going to leave it on file.
7 In this particular case we did update the account to show
8 actually that it remained.
9 Q Okay.
10 A Or that -- yeah, some data elements were changed,
11 but it was not updated to a current account with no
12 delinquencies.
13 Q Isn't it true that Experian placed in its record
14 the additional address that Gulf Coast Bank reported and
15 left the file -- left this particular item in Mr. Carriere's
16 file precisely as Gulf Coast reported it in response to the
17 CDV?
18 A We updated the account to show the new balance
19 amount. And I actually misspoke earlier, because the
20 balance that's listed on here -- and this copy is very light
21 -- is actually -- I think I indicated earlier it was
22 $13,792. It's actually $18,792. So the balance amount was
23 updated.
24 Q Okay. And it was left in file over
25 Mr. Carriere's dispute; correct?

106
1 A Yeah. It was remained on the report or left on
2 the report.

Posted: Sun Nov 27, 2005 2:48 pm
by David A. Szwak
106
3 Q Now, what is the second account that you
4 reinvestigated in October 2002, please?
5 A The next account is Leasecomm Corp.
6 Q And what was the nature of Mr. Carriere's dispute
7 with regard to that company?
8 A Well, according to the log, the dispute reason
9 was also a status dispute that the account was reflecting as
10 a collection account and the dispute was that it was
11 actually a current account with no delinquencies.

12 Q Okay. And did you conduct a CDV reinvestigation
13 with regard to that item?
14 A Yes.
15 Q I did not see a CDV corresponding to it, but
16 let's move on to the next one. What's the third dispute
17 that he lodged?
18 A Into another Leasecomm Corp. account.
19 Q Okay. And what was his dispute with regard to
20 the second Leasecomm item, please?
21 A Well, the dispute reason on the log was also a
22 status dispute. The account should be reflected as a
23 current account, no delinquencies.

24 Q And how did they respond at that point in time?
25 A Leasecomm did not respond.


107
1 Q And based upon their failure to respond, did you
2 remove that item from his credit report permanently?
3 A This account was updated to reflect -- it should
4 have been updated to reflect -- of course, this log isn't
5 going to show me that information, but it should have been
6 updated to reflect an open current account with no
7 delinquencies.
8 Q In essence, you updated favor of what
9 Mr. Carriere claims since the subscriber did not respond?
10 A It was updated based upon the dispute that was
11 lodged.
12 Q When you say the dispute, you took his version
13 when they didn't respond; is that true?
14 A Yes.

Posted: Sun Nov 27, 2005 4:19 pm
by David A. Szwak
112
9 Q I'll show you Exhibit 1, which I believe to be
10 the last CDV or ACDV in connection with the first set of
11 disputes.
12 What is Mr. Carriere contesting that gave
13 rise to Exhibit 1H?
14 A According to the log, the dispute reason was a
15 not mine.
16 Q Now, the subscriber listed on that document is
17 Experian. And Experian is not a subscriber to its own
18 company; right?
19 A Right.
20 Q Do you know who the subscriber was in connection
21 with that ACDV?
22 A Yes. The account matches to a Card Service
23 International, ACQ.
24 Q Okay. And you-all sent the ACDV to them telling
25 him he contested the account as not being his. Am I right

113
1 about that?
2 A That's the dispute that went out.
3 Q Okay. And they responded back verified as
4 reported; is that true?
5 A Under Line Number 22 the response code was
6 verified as reported.
7 Q And subsequently you-all left that item in his
8 credit report; is that true?
9 A The item remained -- ended up remaining in his
10 report.