Page 1 of 11

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

Case No. 

LAURENCE MOSKOWITZ, 

 

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS INC,

and NISSAN-INFINITI LT LLC, 

 

Defendants. 

__________________________________________/ 

COMPLAINT 

Laurence Moskowitz (“Plaintiff”) sues Experian Information Solutions Inc (“Experian”) 

and Nissan-Infinity LT LLC (“Nissan”) for violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”). 

JURISDICTION AND VENUE 

1. Jurisdiction of this Court arises under 15 U.S.C. §1692k(d), 28 U.S.C. § 1331, and 

28 U.S.C. § 1337. 

2. Venue in this District is proper because Plaintiff resides here, Experian and Nissan 

transact business here, and the complained conduct of Experian and Nissan occurred here. 

PARTIES 

3. Plaintiff is a natural person, and a citizen of the State of Florida, residing in Broward 

County, Florida.

4. Experian is an Ohio corporation with its principal place of business located in Costa 

Mesa, California.

5. Nissan is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business 

located in Franklin, Tennessee.

Case 1:22-cv-22745-RKA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/29/2022 Page 1 of 11
Page 2 of 11

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 

6. Plaintiff, respectfully, demands a trial by jury on all counts and issues so triable.

ALLEGATIONS 

7. On a date better known by Nissan, Plaintiff leased a vehicle from Nissan (the 

“Vehicle”). 

8. In 2007, Plaintiff returned the Vehicle to Nissan in accordance with the underlying 

lease agreement. 

9. In response to the return of the Vehicle by Plaintiff, Nissan improperly imposed 

additional charges onto Plaintiff in the amount of $1,934.00 (the “Erroneous Balance”) for “wear 

and tear” which did not exist. 

10. Plaintiff challenged and disputed the existence of any such “wear and tear” with 

Nissan directly. 

11. Notwithstanding Plaintiff’s challenge and/or dispute to Nissan, Nissan proceeded 

to report Erroneous Balance to the national credit reporting agencies, of which included Experian. 

12. On multiple occasions, Plaintiff disputed the Erroneous Balance with Experian; 

however, Experian has not taken any action in response to Plaintiff’s repeated disputes other than

updating Plaintiff’s credit report on December 31, 2021, to reflect the account associated with the 

Erroneous Balance, i.e., the account listed as “NISSAN-INFINITI LT” with account number 

“290093XXXXX” (the “Subject Account”), as accurate. 

13. Experian is engaged in the business of credit reporting and is commonly referred to 

as a “Credit Bureau.” 

14. Experian regularly obtains and analyzes financial information about consumers and 

compiles the information into “credit reports,” which it provides to third parties. 

Case 1:22-cv-22745-RKA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/29/2022 Page 2 of 11
Page 3 of 11

15. Experian is a “consumer reporting agency” as defined by § 1681a(f) of the FCRA 

and compiles the information into “credit reports,” which it provides to third parties. 

16. On May 21, 2021, Plaintiff sent Experian a written dispute regarding the Erroneous 

Balance on the Subject Account (the “Dispute”). 

17. Despite receiving the Dispute, Experian continues to report the Subject Account 

disputed by Plaintiff inaccurately. 

18. Continuing to report Plaintiff’s account status in this fashion is significant. By 

continuing to report Plaintiff’s account status in this fashion, lenders believe Plaintiff has had a 

recent, major delinquency negatively reflecting on the consumer’s credit worthiness by impacting 

their credit score negatively. 

19. Credit scoring algorithms take Plaintiff’s account status into consideration when 

generating a credit score and showing this incorrect account status would cause a lower credit 

score to be generated. 

20. Experian failed to conduct a reasonable investigation. 

21. Experian failed to review and consider all relevant information submitted by 

Plaintiff. 

22. Experian failed to conduct an independent investigation and, instead, deferred to 

underlying furnisher despite the information Plaintiff provided to it (Experian). 

23. Experian possessed evidence that the information was inaccurate as described by 

Plaintiff in the Dispute; however, Experian failed to correct the information. 

24. Experian’s reporting of inaccurate information the subject of the Dispute, despite 

evidence that said information is inaccurate, evidence Experian’s failure to establish or follow 

Case 1:22-cv-22745-RKA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/29/2022 Page 3 of 11
Page 4 of 11

reasonable procedures to assure the maximum possible accuracy of Plaintiff’s credit reports and 

file. 

25. Experian did not conduct any independent investigation after it (Experian) received 

Plaintiff’s dispute and, instead, choose to parrot the information it (Experian) received from the 

underlying furnisher despite being in possession of evidence that the information was inaccurate. 

26. Without any explanation or reason, Experian continues to report this false, 

inaccurate, or otherwise incomplete information, about Plaintiff. 

27. Plaintiff has suffered damages as a result of the incorrect reporting and Experian’s 

failure to correct the credit report pertaining to Plaintiff. 

COUNT 1 

WILLFUL VIOLATION OF THE FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT 

(against Experian) 

28. Plaintiff incorporates by reference ¶¶ 7-27 of this Complaint.

29. On at least one occasion within the past two years, by example only and without 

limitation, Experian violated 15 U.S.C. § 1681e(b) by failing to establish or follow reasonable 

procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy in the preparation of the credit reports and credit 

files published and maintained concerning Plaintiff.

30. Experian failed to establish or follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum 

possible accuracy of Plaintiff’s credit reports and credit files when reinvestigating Plaintiff’s 

disputes of the information contained in Plaintiff’s Experian credit report. 

31. Experian’s procedures were per se deficient by reason of these failures in ensuring 

maximum possible accuracy of Plaintiff’s credit reports and credit files. 

32. Experian has willfully and recklessly failed to comply with the FCRA. The failures 

of Experian to comply with the FCRA include, but are not limited to, the following: [a] the failure 

Case 1:22-cv-22745-RKA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/29/2022 Page 4 of 11
Page 5 of 11

to follow reasonable procedures to assure the maximum possible accuracy of the information 

reported; [b] the failure to correct erroneous personal information regarding Plaintiff after a 

reasonable request by Plaintiff; [c] the failure to remove and/or correct the inaccuracy and 

derogatory credit information after a reasonable request by Plaintiff; [d] the failure to promptly 

and adequately investigate information which Experian had notice was inaccurate; [e] the 

continual placement of inaccurate information into the credit report of Plaintiff after being advised 

by Plaintiff that the information was inaccurate; [f] the failure to note in the credit report that 

Plaintiff disputed the accuracy of the information; [g] the failure to promptly delete information 

that was found to be inaccurate, or could not be verified, or that the source of information had 

advised Experian to delete; and [h] the failure to take adequate steps to verify information Experian 

had reason to believe was inaccurate before including it in the credit report of the consumer. 

33. The conduct, action and inaction of Experian was willful, thereby rendering 

Experian liable for actual, statutory, and punitive damages, in an amount to be determined by a 

judge and/or jury pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1681(n). 

34. Plaintiff is entitled to recover reasonable costs and attorney’s fees from Experian 

in an amount to be determined by the Court pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1681(n). 

35. The appearance of the accounts on Plaintiff’s credit report, namely, those accounts 

identified by Plaintiff in Plaintiff’s dispute to Experian, was the direct and proximate result of 

Experian’s willful failure to maintain reasonable procedures to assure the maximum possible 

accuracy of Plaintiff’s credit report in violation of the 15 U.S.C. § 1681e(b). 

36. As a result of the conduct, action, and inaction, of Experian, Plaintiff suffered 

damage by loss of credit, loss of ability to purchase and benefit from credit, emotional distress, 

and the mental and emotional pain, anguish, humiliation and embarrassment of credit denial. 

Case 1:22-cv-22745-RKA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/29/2022 Page 5 of 11
Page 6 of 11

37. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, respectfully, requests this Court to enter a judgment 

against Experian Information Solutions Inc, awarding Plaintiff the following relief: [1] actual 

damages pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1640(a)(1); [2] statutory damages pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 

1681n(a)(1)(A); [3] statutory damages pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1640(a)(2); [4] after reasonable 

showing by evidence in the record or proffered by Plaintiff which would provide a reasonable 

basis for recovery of such, punitive damages pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1681n(a)(2); [5] costs and 

reasonable attorneys’ fees pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §§ 1640(a)(3) and 1681n(a)(3); and [6] any other 

relief that this Court deems appropriate under the circumstances. 

COUNT 2 

NEGLIGENT VIOLATION OF THE FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT 

(against Experian) 

38. Plaintiff incorporates by reference ¶¶ 7-27 of this Complaint.

39. On at least one occasion within the past two years, by example only and without 

limitation, Experian violated 15 U.S.C. § 1681i(a)(1)(A) by failing to conduct a reasonable 

reinvestigation with respect to the disputed information.

40. On at least one occasion within the past two years, by example only and without 

limitation, Experian violated 15 U.S.C. § 1681i(a)(4) by failing to review and consider all relevant 

information submitted by the Plaintiff with respect to the disputed Information. 

41. On at least one occasion within the past two years, by example only and without 

limitation, Experian violated 15 U.S.C. § 1681i(a)(5) by failing to delete the inaccurate 

information. 

42. Additionally, Experian negligently failed to report accounts identified by Plaintiff 

as “disputed” in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 168li(c). 

Case 1:22-cv-22745-RKA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/29/2022 Page 6 of 11
Page 7 of 11

43. Experian has negligently failed to comply with the FCRA. The failures of Experian 

to comply with the FCRA include, but are not limited to, the following: [a] the failure to follow 

reasonable procedures to assure the maximum possible accuracy of the information reported; [b] 

the failure to correct erroneous personal information regarding Plaintiff after a reasonable request 

by Plaintiff; [c] the failure to remove and/or correct the inaccuracy and derogatory credit 

information after a reasonable request by Plaintiff; [d] the failure to promptly and adequately 

investigate information which Experian had notice was inaccurate; [e] the continual placement of 

inaccurate information into the credit report of Plaintiff after being advised by Plaintiff that the 

information was inaccurate; [f] the failure to note in the credit report that Plaintiff disputed the 

accuracy of the information; [g] the failure to promptly delete information that was found to be 

inaccurate, or could not be verified, or that the source of information had advised Experian to 

delete; and [h] the failure to take adequate steps to verify information Experian had reason to 

believe was inaccurate before including it in the credit report of the consumer. 

44. The conduct, action, and inaction, of Equifax was negligent, thereby rendering 

Experian liable for actual, statutory, and punitive damages, in an amount to be determined by a 

judge and/or jury pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1681(n). 

45. Plaintiff is entitled to recover reasonable costs and attorneys’ fees from Experian 

in an amount to be determined by the Court pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1681(n). 

46. As a result of the conduct, action and inaction of Experian, Plaintiff suffered 

damage by loss of credit, loss of ability to purchase and benefit from credit, emotional distress, 

and the mental and emotional pain, anguish, humiliation and embarrassment of credit denial. 

47. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, respectfully, requests this Court to enter a judgment 

against Experian Information Solutions Inc, awarding Plaintiff the following relief: [1] actual 

Case 1:22-cv-22745-RKA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/29/2022 Page 7 of 11
Page 8 of 11

damages pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1681o(a)(1); [2] costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees pursuant to 

15 U.S.C. § 1681o(a)(2); and [3] any other relief that this Court deems appropriate under the 

circumstances.

COUNT 3 

WILLFUL VIOLATION OF THE FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT 

(against Nissan) 

48. Plaintiff incorporates by reference ¶¶ 7-27 of this Complaint.

49. On at least one occasion within the past two years, by example only and without 

limitation, Nissan violated 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(b)(1)(A) by failing to conduct a reasonable 

investigation with respect to the disputed information. 

50. On at least one occasion within the past two years, by example only and without 

limitation, Nissan violated 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(b)(1)(B) by failing to review all relevant 

information provided by the consumer reporting agencies. 

51. On at least one occasion within the past two years, by example only and without 

limitation, Nissan violated 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(b)(1)(E) by failing to delete the inaccurate 

information. 

52. Upon information and belief, Nissan was aware of the FCRA obligations to 

reasonably investigate disputes when it received notice of Plaintiff’s disputes. 

53. When Nissan received notice of Plaintiff’s dispute from Experian, Nissan could 

and should have reviewed its own systems and previous communications with the Plaintiff as part 

of its investigation. 

54. Nissan would have discovered that the information it was reporting about Plaintiff 

was inaccurate if Nissan had reviewed its own systems and previous communications with the 

Plaintiff.

Case 1:22-cv-22745-RKA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/29/2022 Page 8 of 11
Page 9 of 11

55. Nissan’s investigation was per se deficient by reason of these failures on Nissan’s 

investigation of Plaintiff’s dispute. 

56. As a direct and proximate result of Nissan’s violations of § 1681s-2(b), Plaintiff 

suffered actual damages, including but not limited to: (i) money lost attempting to fix Plaintiff’s 

credit; (ii) denial of financing for home loans (iii) loss of time attempting to cure the errors in 

Plaintiff’s credit; (iv) mental anguish, added stress, aggravation, embarrassment, and other related 

impairments to the enjoyment of life such as headaches, irritability, anxiety and loss of sleep; (v) 

reduction in credit score; and (vi) apprehensiveness to apply for credit due to fear of rejection. 

57. Nissan’s actions in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(b), were willful, rendering it 

liable for actual or statutory damages as well as punitive damages as the Court may allow and 

attorney’s fees in an amount to be determined by the Court pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1681n. 

58. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, respectfully, requests this Court to enter a judgment 

against Nissan-Infinity LT LLC, awarding Plaintiff the following relief: [1] actual damages 

pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1681o(a)(1); [2] costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 

§ 1681o(a)(2); and [3] any other relief that this Court deems appropriate under the circumstances. 

COUNT 4 

NEGLIGENT VIOLATION OF THE FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT 

(against Nissan) 

59. Plaintiff incorporates by reference ¶¶ 7-27 of this Complaint.

60. On at least one occasion within the past two years, by example only and without 

limitation, Nissan violated 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(b)(1)(A) by failing to conduct a reasonable 

investigation with respect to the disputed information.

Case 1:22-cv-22745-RKA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/29/2022 Page 9 of 11
Page 10 of 11

61. On one or more occasions within the past two years, by example only and without 

limitation, Nissan violated 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(b)(1)(B) by failing to review all relevant 

information provided by the consumer reporting agencies. 

62. On one or more occasions within the past two years, by example only and without 

limitation, Nissan violated 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(b)(1)(E) by failing to delete the inaccurate 

information. 

63. When Nissan received notice of Plaintiff’s dispute from Experian, Nissan could 

and should have reviewed its own systems and previous communications with the Plaintiff as part 

of its investigation. 

64. Nissan would have discovered that the information it was reporting about Plaintiff 

was inaccurate if Nissan had reviewed its own systems and previous communications with the 

Plaintiff.

65. Nissan’s investigation was per se deficient by reason of these failures on Nissan’s 

investigation of Plaintiff’s dispute. 

66. As a direct and proximate result of Nissan’s violations of § 1681s-2(b), Plaintiff 

suffered actual damages, including but not limited to: (i) money lost attempting to fix Plaintiff’s 

credit; (ii) denial of financing for home loans (iii) loss of time attempting to cure the errors in 

Plaintiff’s credit; (iv) mental anguish, added stress, aggravation, embarrassment, and other related 

impairments to the enjoyment of life such as headaches, irritability, anxiety and loss of sleep; (v) 

reduction in credit score; and (vi) apprehensiveness to apply for credit due to fear of rejection. 

67. Nissan’s actions constitute negligent noncompliance with the FCRA rendering it 

liable for actual damages as well as attorney’s fees in an amount to be determined by the Court 

pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §1681o. 

Case 1:22-cv-22745-RKA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/29/2022 Page 10 of 11
Page 11 of 11

68. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, respectfully, requests this Court to enter a judgment 

against Nissan-Infinity LT LLC, awarding Plaintiff the following relief: [1] actual damages 

pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1681o(a)(1); [2] costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 

§ 1681o(a)(2); and [3] any other relief that this Court deems appropriate under the circumstances. 

DATED: August 29, 2022 

Respectfully Submitted, 

 /s/ Thomas Patti .

THOMAS PATTI, ESQ.

Florida Bar No. 118377 

E-mail: Tom@pzlg.legal 

VICTOR ZABALETA, ESQ. 

Florida Bar No. 118517 

E-mail: Victor@pzlg.legal 

PATTI ZABALETA LAW GROUP 

3325 Northwest 55th Street 

Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33309 

Phone: 561-542-8550 

Case 1:22-cv-22745-RKA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/29/2022 Page 11 of 11