1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

) ) 

John G. Warner (Cal. State Bar No. 046123) 

Law Office of John G. Warner 

21 Tamai Vista Blvd., Suite 196 

Corte Madera, CA 94925 

Telephone: ( 415) 924-2640 

Facsimile: (415) 927-0608 

Email: wamerwest@aol.com 

Attorney for Plaintiffs, 

DEC 1 6 2016 

JAMES M. KIM, Court Executive Officer 

MARDI COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT 

By: E. Chais, Deputy 

James M. Clifford and Margaret Clifford 

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 

IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF MARIN 

UNLIMITED CIVIL DIVISION 

JAMES M. CLIFFORD and 

MARGARET CLIFFORD, 

individuals, 

Plaintiffs, 

vs. 

KAISER FOUNDATION 

HEATH PLAN, INC., 

a corporation; and 

DOES 1 through 21, 

Defendants. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case No. Ch) 16045024

= 

COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATION 

OF CONSUMER PROTECTION 

STATUTES AND FOR RELATED 

CAUSES OF ACTION AND FOR 

DECLARATORY RELIEF 

________ ) 

[Text begins on Next Page] 

Complaint for Violation of Consumer Protection Statutes - 1 

EXHIBIT A at 1

Case 3:17-cv-00658-MMC Document 1-1 Filed 02/09/17 Page 1 of 7
1 

2 

3 

4 

) ) 

Plaintiffs James M. Clifford and Margaret Clifford allege as follows: 

PARTIES TO THIS ACTION 

1. Plaintiff James M. Clifford and Margaret Clifford are husband and wife 

5 who reside in Novato, Marin County, California. 

6 2. Defendant Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc. is a corporation with its 

7 principal place of business located in Oakland, California and does business under the 

8 fictitious name of Kaiser Permanente. Defendant Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc. 

9 will be referred to herein as "Kaiser". 

10 3. Plaintiffs are ignorilllt of the true meanings and capacities and/or potential 

11 liability of the defendants sued herein as Does I through 20, inclusive, and therefore 

12 plaintiffs have sued these defendants by such fictitious names. Plaintiffs will seek leave 

13 of court to amend this Complaint to allege the true names and capacities of these 

14 fictitious defendants when the same have been ascertained. Plaintiffs are informed and 

15 believe and thereon allege that each of the fictitious named defendants is responsible in 

16 some manner for the occurrences alleged in this Complaint, and plaintiffs are further 

17 informed and believe that their damages as alleged in this Complaint were illegally 

18 caused by such fictitiously named defendants. 

19 4. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that at all times 

20 mentioned herein, each of the defendants sued in this Complaint, including each 

21 fictitiously named defendant, was the agent, servant and/or employee of each of the 

22 remaining defendants, and in doing the things hereinafter alleged, each defendant was 

23 acting in the scope of its authority as such agent, servant and/or employee, with the 

24 permission and consent of the remaining defendants. 

25 I 

26 I 

27 I 

28 / 

Complaint for Violation of Consumer Protection Statutes - 2 

EXHIBIT A at 2

Case 3:17-cv-00658-MMC Document 1-1 Filed 02/09/17 Page 2 of 7
) 

1 SUMMARY OF FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS 

2 5. In late December 2014, the plaintiffs' twin children were delivered at Kaise 

3 Permanente Hospital in Marin County. After the delivery, it was determined that one o 

4 the twins needed additional care and had to remain in the hospital's neonatal intensive 

5 care unit (NICU). Because these where twins, the ti·eating physician ordered that both 

6 twins should stay in the hospital longer than normal, along with their mother, plaintiff 

7 Margaret Clifford, until this additional care was completed. This procedure proved to be 

8 very expensive, causing the plaintiffs to incur more than $5,000 in hospital and medical 

9 expenses. 

10 6. These additional hospital and medical expense eventually led to a bona fide 

11 dispute between the plaintiffs and Kaiser, with Kaiser contending the plaintiffs owed 

12 Kaiser an additional sum of $414, which plaintiffs disputed. Despite this bona fide 

13 dispute, Kaiser reported to the major credit reporting bureaus, including Experian, 

14 TransUnion and Equifax, that the plaintiffs were thirty (30) days or more late in paying 

15 this $414 claim. Kaiser did not report the fact that this is a disputed claim. Through the 

16 present time, Kaiser continues to make these false reports to the credit bureaus. 

17 7. As a proximate result of these improper credit dispute reportings, plaintiffs, 

18 and each of them, have sustained significant impairments to their creditworthiness, 

19 including a significant drop in their credit scores, with the result that they now have 

20 difficulty obtaining loans for real property, automobiles, or other consumable products, 

21 and with the result that when they do obtain such loans or refinancing, the cost thereof is 

22 significantly greater than would be the case if the defendants had not improperly made 

23 these credit reports. 

24 

25 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION 

26 (Breach of Statutory Duty) 

27 8. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate herein below each of the allegations set 

28 forth in paragraphs 1 through 7 set forth above. 

Complaint for Violation of Consumer Protection Statutes - 3 

EXHIBIT A at 3

Case 3:17-cv-00658-MMC Document 1-1 Filed 02/09/17 Page 3 of 7
) 

1 9. Defendants, and each of them, in making the improper credit reports to the 

2 credit bureaus, as alleged above, violated various statutes which have been enacted to 

3 protect consumers such as the plaintiffs. These statutes include, but are not limited to, 

4 1 l U.S. Code §16929(e)(9); 11 U.S. Code §16929(e)(I0); and the California Code of 

5 Civil Procedure §1785.25(a). 

6 10. As a proximate result of defendants' violations of the statutes referenced 

7 above, as well as their violations of any other relevant consumer protection statutes, 

8 plaintiffs have sustained compensatory damages and they are entitled to statutory fees, 

9 penalties, and punitive damages. The amounts of these damages and these statutory fees 

10 and penalties will be determined at time of trial. 

11 

12 

13 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION 

14 (Negligence Per Se) 

15 (Breach of Statutory Duty) 

16 · 11. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate herein below each of the allegations set 

17 forth in paragraphs 1 through 10 set forth above. 

18 12. Defendants' violations of the statutes cited above and the violations of any 

19 other consumer protection statutes that may be applicable to the facts of this case, 

20 constitute what is called negligence per se. Negligence per se means that any violations 

21 of these statutes constitutes negligence on the part of the defendants. 

22 13. As a proximate result of defendants' violations of the statutes referenced 

23 above, as well as their violations of any other relevant consumer protection statutes, 

24 plaintiffs have sustained compensatory damages and they are entitled to statutory fees, 

25 penalties, and punitive damages. The amounts of these damages and these statutory fees 

26 and penalties will be determined at time of trial. 

27 

28 

Complaint for Violation of Consumer Protection Statutes - 4 

EXHIBIT A at 4

Case 3:17-cv-00658-MMC Document 1-1 Filed 02/09/17 Page 4 of 7
1 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION 

2 (Intentional Breach of Statutory Duty) 

3 14. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate herein below each of the allegations set 

4 forth in paragraphs 1 through 13 set forth above. 

5 15. The defendants' failure to correct the credit reporting errors, as alleged 

6 above, constituted intentional vi,::>lation of the statutory duties alleged above. 

7 16. As a proximate result of defendants' intentional breach of these statutory 

8 duties referenced above, as well as their violations of any other relevant consumer 

9 protection statutes, plaintiffs have sustained compensatory damages and they are entitled 

10 to statutory fees, penalties, and punitive damages. The amounts of these damages and 

11 these statutory fees and penalties will be determined at time of trial. 

12 

13 

14 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION 

15 (Breach of Implied Contract) 

16 17. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate herein below each of the allegations set 

17 forth in paragraphs 1 through 16 set forth above. 

18 18. Based upon the dealings between plaintiffs and the defendants, as alleged 

19 above, an implied contract arose. Under the terms of this implied contract, the 

20 defendants, and each of them, promised to report to the credit bureaus such as Experian, 

21 TransUnion, and Equifax, accurate credit information pertaining to the plaintiffs. 

22 and reasonable in their reporting of credit information. 

23 19. Defendants breached this implied contract by making credit reports to the 

24 credit bureaus which were false, inaccurate, misleading, and/or incomplete. 

25 20. As a proximate result of defendants' breach of the implied contracts, as 

26 alleged above, plaintiffs have sustained compensatory damages and they are entitled to 

27 statutory fees, penalties, and punitive damages. The amounts of these damages and 

28 these statutory fees and penalties will be determined at time of trial. 

Complaint for Violation of Consumer Protection Statutes - 5 

EXHIBIT A at 5

Case 3:17-cv-00658-MMC Document 1-1 Filed 02/09/17 Page 5 of 7
1 FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION 

2 ~~fil~ry~~ 

3 21. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate herein below each of the allegations set 

4 forth in pfilagraphs 1 through 20 set forth above. 

5 22. An actual controversy has arisen and now exists between plaintiffs 

6 and the defendants concerning their respective rights and duties. Plaintiffs contend 

7 the defendants are obligated to cease publishing adverse credit information 

8 concerning the plaintiffs, and the defendants deny they have any such obligation. 

9 23. Wherefore, plaintiffs seek a judicial determination of their respect 

1 O rights and duties between plaintiffs and the defendants with respect to the validity 

11 of the underlying credit accounts and the defendants' continued publication of 

12 information that adversely affects plaintiffs' credit ratings. 

13 24. Such determination and declaration is necessary and appropriate at 

14 this time in order that plaintiffs may ascertain their rights and duties as against 

15 defendants, and to restore their ability to obtain credit for themselves on 

16 commercially favorable terms. 

17 

18 PRAYER FOR RELIEF 

19 WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for judgment against each defendant as set forth 

20 below: 

21 

22 

23 

24 

(a) For general and compensatory damages according to proof; 

(b) For statutory fees and penalties according to proof; 

( c) For punitive damages according to proof; 

( d) For a declfilation for rights and duties of plaintiffs and defendants with 

25 regard to the matters described in this Complaint. 

26 

27 

28 

(e) For cost of suit and attorney fees; 

Complaint for Violation of Consumer Protection Statutes - 6 

EXHIBIT A at 6

Case 3:17-cv-00658-MMC Document 1-1 Filed 02/09/17 Page 6 of 7
) 

1 

2 

(f) For such other and further relief as the Court may deem proper. 

3 Dated: December 14, 2016 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 Clifford v Kaiser Complaint 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

~,~,&(~ 

Jo~er . 

Attorney for Plaintiffs 

James M. Clifford and Margaret Clifford 

Complaint for Violation of Consumer Protection Statutes - 7 

EXHIBIT A at 7

Case 3:17-cv-00658-MMC Document 1-1 Filed 02/09/17 Page 7 of 7